Review: Towards an Understanding of the Non-Brahman Movement

Reviewed Work(s): Cultural Revolution in Colonial Society: The Non-Brahman Movement

in Western India, 1873-1930 by Gail Omvedt
Review by: B. T. Ranadive
Source: Social Scientist , Mar., 1978, Vol. 6, No. 8 (Mar., 1978), pp. 77-94
Published by: Social Scientist

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3520136

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Scientist

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Review Article

Towards An Understanding of the

Non-Brahman Movement

CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN COLONIAL SOCIETY-THE NON-

BRAHMAN /IOVEMENT IN WESTERN INDIA, 1873-1930, by Gail
Scientific Socialist Education Trust, Bombay, 1976. Rs 40.

THE book is a slightly revised version of a Ph D dissertation ac

by the Department of Sociology of the University of California, B
in March 1973. The author says that the ultimate surplus which
this book possible was the labour of Indian peasants, as her field
was mainly financed from the American aid rupees of the
funds.

A scientific understanding of the non-Brahman movement,

had such a powerful ideological impact on Maharashtra, h
welcomed. One learns from the achievements and mistakes of t
to avoid new pitfalls in the present and guard the purity and con
of the revolutionary proletarian movement.
There have been two wrong approaches to the non-Bra
movement hitherto. There has been an uncritical condemnation
movement as sectarian and communal at the hands of earlier C
bourgeois leaders, just as they have condemned every indep
movement of the masses which threatened to go out of their re
working class and Communist movement knew what it is to su
the hands of the bourgeois leadership. The other wrong approa
been an uncritical glorification of the movement-a glorificatio
is easily accepted by present day Congress leaders because it do
teach the masses the real lessons to be drawn for the contem
times. Some of the erstwhile non-Brahman leaders are loudest
praise of the principles of the early movement, while in action
as its worst opponents.

Jyotiba's Revolt

The author starts with the concept of cultural revolution-a

non-class concept--which does not really grasp the full ambit of

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
78 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

revolt. (A Cultural Revolution after the capture of pow

class, is also not simply a "cultural revolution"-in the
by the author).
One important, and perhaps the most valuable,
the author is the understanding of the different phas
the original movement passed. The dilution of the
basic principles, started very early and Jyotiba him
contend against it. Jyotiba the great iconoclast democ
the poor and oppressed, never wavered in his loyal
in giving priority to their interests. Whether it was w
education, liquor shops, caste exploitation, bureaucr
usury and land alienation, the economic loot of India,
new market or decorations to greet a Viceroy at th
people, or a dinner to a royal visitor, he defended the
masses without prevarication and fears. His passion fo
was unheard of and his sense of justice included every
and he had absolutely no caste bias. He also demande
for Muslims and Christians. No wonder the movem
named only as the satyashodhak movement-a move
untruth, injustice and hypocrisy of the Hindu social or
Brahman supremacy.
A movement for equality, against caste-domina
to have an anti-Brahman edge at the time, the Bra
supreme caste in the Hindu hierarchy. Certain othe
the situation. Jyotiba's generation could not forget
Peshwa rule under Bajirao II, Keer, the biographer o
Loakahitwadi on the conditions under Bajirao II as f
farmers failed to pay him the desired amount even du
famine, he poured over their children boiling oil from
flogging was perfected on their stooping backs, and
bent over suffocating smoke. Gunpowder was blown o
ears." Loakahitwadi is again quoted as saying that
deposed by the British, women rejoiced and said: "W
there is now no more the rule of Bajirao II. The scoun
fate he deserved." The second factor was that despite the loss of
political power, the Brahmans continued to dominate Hindu society,
treating the non-Brahmans as inferior beings. Finally, the new intelli-
gentsia under the British came mostly from the advanced Brahman
community, occupying strategic positions as officials, professors, lower
bureaucrats, writers and editors, creating the fear of the return of the
old nightmare.
Though Jyotiba inevitably directed the fire of his righteous indi-
gnation at the Brahmans, his vision was not a narrow sectarian one, but
consistently democratic. That is why he was the most uncompromising
opponent of Brahmanism. There could be no compromise between him

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN WESTERN INDIA 79

and his opponents, for he did not seek a place for any partic
nity in the Hindu hierarchy.

Other Exponents of Non-Brahmanism

But things were otherwise with the other exponents of

manism. Perhaps the most important figure after Jyotiba i
ment was Shahu, the feudal prince of Kolhapur, a des
Shivaji.
One could not imagine two more dissimilar personalities: Jyotiba,
the common man who had loyalty only to the masses and who wanted
to be the great leveller; the feudal prince, with his loyalty to the British,
his insensitiveness to the economic exploitation of the masses by the
British, and his narrow understanding of the fight against Brahmanism.
Gail Omvedt very correctly distinguishes the two viewpoints, the dilution
of the original movement that starts with the emergence of Shahu. She
writes: "But while the seeds of conflict were laid in Shahu's administra-
tion and the British were very clearly willing to water the ground, it
was the Vedokta ceremony which caused the plant to blossom." The
Maharaja wanted to be recognised as a kshatriya and considered himself
entitled to Vedokta rights, while the priests were giving him Puranokta
rights, that is, treating him as a Shudra.
The author correctly comments: "In reality, the Maharaj at this
time was a conservative one; he was concerned about insult to his purity
of lineage, he was insisting on proper recognition as a Kshatriya. His
initial position, in fact, was to state simply that the issue concerned only
himself, and not the other aristocratic Maratha families." This was
worlds apart from the principles and vision of Jyotiba.
Tilak, that doyen of bourgeois nationalism, was so 'progressive'
that he considered that Vedokta rights might be awarded to Shahu as the
'Chhatrapati' or King but not as a hereditary family right.

Opportunism and the Dilution of jyotiba's Principles

The Maharaja promoted education among the non-Brahmans

and opened common hostels to which all castes were admitted. He
outraged some of the Maratha sardars by freely mixing with untouchables
and dining with them. The author pinpoints the real distance that
separated the original from its diluted version:
The hostels both encouraged and were based upon a theme of
separate caste development enlivened with a liberal spirit (for
example, Muslim students were encouraged to stay in the Maratha
hostel until their own was completed). They allowed social uplift
without directly attempting to break down barriers between com-
munities. Thus it was consistent for him to give full encourage-
ment to untouchables' social progress and to sponsor Ambedkar

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
80 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

as the pre-eminent untouchable leader, but at the sam

stimulate the pride and separate sense of 'Maratha' or
caste identity. The problem was that this was a conservat
of separate caste pride that in the end acted against a
inter-caste unity. The conservative aspect of reform coul
seen in Shahu's organisation in 1911 of a school for tr
patils; this was focussed on the sons of hereditary village
and thus on the maintenance of the traditional village
(p. 129).
In the end he attempted to do without Brahman priests in his
own way by setting up a Shivaji Kshatriya Vedic school for
training Maratha priests in 1920 and by installing a Maratha high
priest or installing a Kshatriya Jagatguru or world teacher of
Kshatriyas in 1921. This action went against the satyashodhak
principle which opposed any priestly intermediary, and caused
a split within the non-Brahman movement itself. Almost all non-
Marathas stringently attacked the ideas of Kshatriya Jagatguru,
while Marathas on the whole, except for staunch satyashodhaks like
Bhaskar Rao Jadav, supported it.
It was logical then that the Maharaja should turn to the Arya
Samaj for educational purposes. However, this feudal prince, in the
matter of untouchables, was far ahead of many avowed hourgeois
rationalists.

Jyotiba died in 1890. Within ten years of his passing away, the
new leader started fighting for Vedokta rights for the Marathas; and
during another two decades the ideology had turned full circle, with
compromise with the caste system - only, the Brahmans were to be
replaced by Kshatriyas.
The poison then spread. It corroded the original revolutionary
content ofJyotiba's satyashodhak principles. Only a hard core continued
to stand by them, but they were more and more overwhelmed by the new
opportunism to seek a favourable place for one's own community -
especially the dominant Maratha community - in the Hindu hierarchy
and, later on, for the struggle for office and patronage under the British.
The British had a hand in this diversion (of this, there is ample evidence)
but strangely enough the author hardly mentions it, whereas ample
material concerning this should be available.
This opportunism to seek the shelter of one's own caste gathered
momentum just at the time when the developing national movement, the
increasing participation of the masses in it, and the need for further
mobilisation of the masses was compelling the bourgeois nationalist
eaders to change or modify their attitude of defence or neutrality
towards caste-domination. Because of dilution, the satyashodak movement
began to be stagnant and to disintegrate, though a heroic band of
fighters maintained their purity of outlook and rebellious spirit. Con-

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN WESTERN INDIA 81

ferences of various castes began to hold the field and the earlier
all down trodden castes against the hierarchical order bega
undermined. The author correctly brings out this phase also.
Compromise with British Imperialism

British imperialism was to profit by this straying away f

earlier rebellious mood. With this change in outlook, the anti-
oratory became merely anti-Brahman and did not represent an
manism--an attack to destroy root and branch the entire caste
It represented more the effort to secure positions in the new
through verbal attacks against the system.
This led to relying on the British against the national mov
under the plea that it was led by the Brahmans. "In the 1
represented one of the opposition parties which the British so
utilise to work for legislative councils as a counter weight to G
non-cooperation. It thus served as one of the many ways of re
pressures for a radical mass nationalism." (p. 178)
This degradation of the movement, where the leadership
itself against the first great mass anti-imperialist ferment or r
marked the long distance which separated it from the earliest
The excuse that this was due to the excluding elitism of th
nationalist leaders themselves is a hypocritical excuse which the
nist leaders pleaded for themselves, which the author should n
offered. The fact was that the leaders of the movement-the ne
Brahman intelligentsia - found the non-cooperation progra
radical, and were more concerned with improving their positi
the help of the Government. Here their position differed fro
the Muslims also-the Muslim mass and radical leaders t
themselves filly in the struggle, attracted by Congress sup
Khilafat.

The result was that when huge numbers in cities and villages were
boiling with indignation over the Jallianwalla Bagh massacre, when the
working masses in Bombay-mostly non-Brahman, if you please...were
engaged in angry demonstrations against the visit of the Prince of Wales
the Kolhapur Maharaja succeeded in drawing a large number of peasants
to Poona to greet the Prince of Wales, who was given the honour of
laying the foundation stone of the Shivaji Memorial.
The excuse that the Congress and the nationalist movement was
dominated by Chitpavanas was also not there. For the new leadership
represented by Gandhi and others was of a different mould-though
belonging to the same class-and the earlier orthodox leadership of
Maharashtra was on its way out of the Congress. It was, however, no
accident that the diehard orthodox section of the Maharashtra Congress
also opposed the non-cooperation movement like the new non-Brahnian
leaders.

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
82 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

Merger with the Congress

But, obviously, this divorcement from the anti-impe

could not last long. There was enough vitality in the m
come this degradation, the more so that it was linked w
mass; and the peasant mass of India after 1920 was a diff
that in the previous years. By 1930, when the new Con
began to reach the peasantry, the radical and fighting
non-Brahman movement overcame their separation fro
movement, joined it, and the movement merged in the
Though this was far better than waiting on the Brit
ing in opposition to the national movement led by th
was certainly not a fitting sequel to the all-round rebelli
tried to unleash.

His programme of a total annihilation of the Hindu hierarchical

system could have been carried out only by combining it with a pro-
gramme for the destruction of feudal and semi-feudal relations and for
political power in the hands of the democratic masses, in short, a pro-
gramme for the completion of the democratic revolution. Neither the
compromising leadership of the Congress, nor the new patriotic leader-
ship of the non-Brahman movement was capable of this, because both
belonged to the same class. Only the working class guided by Marxism-
Leninism could have done it; but its movement was weak and it had
just started demarcating its politics from that of the national bour-
geoisie.
The sum total was a retreat on all fronts, helping the bourgeois
leaders to gather the masses behind them. The hope of an independent
revolutionary mobilisation of the people raised by the pioneer disappea-
red. A movement which could have independently mobilised the peas-
antry for a revolutionary onslaught went under the leadership of the
bourgeoisie.
The author correctly sees the different phases connected with the
rise and fall of the movement, but in her uncritical adulation, fails to
note the enormity of the support given to the British against the people.
Also, she fails to note specifically the fact that the peasant masses were
rapidly being attracted towards the national struggle led by the Congress
as she refuses to accept the fact that national sentiment was drawing the
people together despite the fact that the bourgeois leaders had not shed
their caste prejudices.

Methodological Weaknesses

The merit of the book notwithstanding, it suffers from many

shortcomings, weaknesses and a wrong understanding. These stand out
all the more sharply as the author expresses her interest in Marxism-

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN WESTERN INDIA 83

Leninism and the publishers certify it to be a Marxist-Leninis

cation.

One has to regretfully state that the book does not pass this test.
In the first place, it contains a lot of meaningless lumber manufactured
in the West, where bourgeois sociological theories and theories of history
are in a crisis. It is this approach that is dominant in the book, not the
class approach. Secondly, the entire book is written out of the context
of the national and anti-imperialist struggle, depicting the earlier Con-
gress efforts as virtually Brahman efforts by Brahmans and for Brahmans.
Notwithstanding her good intentions, she is too much entangled in these
caste categories. Almost every bourgeois nationalist leader of the
Congress is referred to as Brahman. Some Communist leaders are also
referred to as Brahman Communists. Only, she does not refer to Gandhi
as a bania. A person who claims to be a Marxist has to penetrate the
class reality that takes shape behind the caste process and conflict and
drag it in the open.
This is the inevitable result of an outlook which, under the pre-
tence of analysing the conflict-the cultural conflict between various
ethnic and other groups in a colonial society-ignores the basic conflict
of all with the colonial power and colonial domination. The picture that
is presented is that the upper class groups fights the colonial power for
its advance; and the other group fight the upper class group for gaining
advantage, for themselves; that is "Brahman national elites were strug-
gling against a real British racism that affected all Indians; the non-
Brahmans or untouchables against its equivalent in a real Brahman
exclusiveness and disdain for lower castes." Is this a Marxist statement?
Was the significance of Jyotiba's rebellion only of import to non-Brah-
mans; only directed towards improving the position of non-Brahmans in
competition with the Brahmans? This is what the Brahmans alleged. A
Marxist should realise that the objective significance was a liberation
challenge to the entire Hindu society and to the colonial structure.
Such an approach and such conclusions are inevitable because
the author frankly states that she does not rely on Marxism-Leninism.
She found that Lenin and Stalin had left no guidance, and therefore the
discussion of 'plural society' elements in the final section of the Chapter
is drawn primarily from J S Funivall, a Fabian Socialist.

Concealing Class Conflict

The author, although she now and then mentions classes and class
interests, allows her outlook to be dominated by anti-Marxist concepts
like plural society and competition between elites. To conceal the grim
realities of the class struggle and the domination of the State by mono-
polies, the apologists of Western capitalists have advanced the concept
of pluralism as an alternative to the Marxist class analysis of society and

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
84 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

political power. Pluralist democracy or pluralist society

competition or compromise among a group of multitud
which saves the society from the tyranny of the elite. Cl
replaced by the conflicts, and compromise, of groups. Insp
good formulations and a correct understanding on some is
look dominates the author. One result of it is to divorce the understand-
ing of the non-Brahman movement and other movements from its relatio
to the movement against the colonial order, from the basic antagonism
of the people to the enslaver. Consider the following: "Groups who
were disproportionately unrepresented, such as Muslims, non-Brahman
and elites from other linguistic regions in India, would direct thei
agitation at first against the dominant indigenous elites who more imme
diately blocked their advancement, not against the colonial rulers them
selves. And just as the dominant elites based their demands vis-a-vis th
British on their representing an Indian nationalism, so the exclude
elites often based their demands against the dominant groups on some
form of 'regional' or religious sub-nationalism; demands for a separate
Bihari or Oriya or Kanarese province within which they might domina
an anti-Brahman, an anti-Northern Tamil nationalism, Muslim
nationalism." (p. 31) The technique is simple here. The word elite i
used to conceal the class affiliations of the leadership and its link with
the economic development. The entire awakening of nationalities an
oppressed sections under the poverty imposed by the colonial rulers is
reduced to a fight between two sections of elites. The masses are made
to look like pawns, a passive force having no will of its own. This is one
of the purposes of the plural society-elitist competition theory.
In reality, the process of anti-imperialist struggle, the deteriora-
tion in the conditions of the masses, the anti-caste struggles, all were
leading to a new awakening among various nationalities and religious
groups. On a number of occassions, imperialist agents and selfish bour-
geois leaders succeeded in diverting this democratic awakening into
fratricidal channels, but the democratic thread was again picked up
Owing to several reasons into which we need not go, there was failure to
bring the Muslim masses finally into the united fold and this was mainly
a class failure of the compromising bourgeoisie who dared not champion
the agrarian revolution.
Failing to understand the various democratic movements as part
of a single process which was leading to a confrontation of the people
of the masses, against imperialism and its allies, understanding them as
conflicts between ethnic or caste groups, Gail Omvedt misses the main
process:-the formation of a nation with its new classes and leadership
arising from various sections of the old society. For her a Brahman
remains a Brahman, a non-Brahman a non-Brahman. She fails to see
the new class arising behind them, though here and there she notes
them.

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN WESTERN INDIA 85

The New Intelligentsia

The earlier "Brahman" nationalists were not Brahman

as far as they wielded the cudgel against the British, r
feeling and anti-British hatred, they were fulfilling a nati
serving the entire people. Many of them also directed the
against the Hindu caste system and exposed the tyranny
rule; some of them stood by Jyotiba till the last. By a
either defended the caste system or were only for a m
modification of the system. Some were open justifiers of
among them Lokamanya Tilak. With all that, they repres
bourgeois intelligentsia, introducing new democratic valu
the people conscious of their slavery. To look upon th
Brahmans is to do violence to the objective role they were
a few chapters create the impression that these people were
for Brahmans - a favourite theme of imperialist chr
amounts to underestimating the importance of the anti-im
iousness that was being created. Mr. Keer, the biographer o
a more sober and objective understanding of the role of t
although he does not call himself a Marxist-Leninist. (See h
Chiplunkar, who excelled everybody in his orthodoxy and
defended the inequalities of caste rule, including the atro
the Peshwas).
This is not to say that these leaders did not deserve th
which Jyotiba gave them. Compared with him, many were
But a Marxist-Leninist must understand the objective role
and classes and place the workings of the social process ca
she cannot borrow the spectacles of other classes or section
or unconsciously, the author slurs over issues of common in
the two sections - Jyotiba and his nationalist opponents -
do not fit in with the theory of ethnic conflict. It is known t
denouncing a Brahman official to protect the interests of
Prince that Tilak and Agarkar saw the British jail the fir
Jyotiba helped them fight the case. Tilak was denonuced
onary opponents as the leader of "telis and tambolis" (non
a rabble rouser. Even his imperialist critics described him
of Indian unrest and had to write about him: "He appealed
of his Maratha people by raising the cult of Shivaji, the g
chieftain who first raised the standard of Hindu revolt aga
medan domination, and he appealed to their religious passio
under the patronage of their favourite deities a national
boycotting British-imported goods and manufactures, whic
name of Swadeshi, was to be the first step towards Swaraj.
who for the first time imported into schools and colleges t
political agitation and presided at bonfires which schoolboy

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
86 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

fed with their European text books and European clothe

people - not Brahmans only - recognised his pioneeri
the foreign enslaver; the working class of Bombay ('non
terms of the author) paid the most glowing tribute to h
tested in 1908 against his prolonged imprisonment
launched a strike, and confronted the British police and
streets of Bombay. This, of course, did not prevent Tila
Brahman bhojan in Poona a decade later after the end of
And this latter act did not prevent the Bombay wor
gathering in thousands to mourn his passing away in Bo
This was the double-faced intelligentsia of those da
the aims and interests of the rising bourgeoisie, it atta
but at the same time allied itself with the old feudal order and institut-
ions and explained it as concentrating fire on the foreign enemy first. Its
opposition to the anti-moneylender bills was part of its class alliance,
not just caste alliance. It defended the peasant only against Government
exactions and attacked the land tax and other measures, but till very
late in the day it refused to mention agrarian relations in its programme.

Plebian Revolutionary Current

But the intelligentsia and democratic trends were not arising only
among the upper caste sections. Down below also there was ferment;
and Western education and the new developments were throwing up
new leaders and sections who were challenging their own inferior status
in the Hindu caste society. Some of them, while framing their democra-
tic demands, could not look beyond their own narrow circle - caste,
community-but Jyotiba was of a different mould. He represented the
plebian revolutionary current-plebian, because it arose straight from
the position of the lower order of Hindu society to which the peasant
belonged-and therefore represented a consistent uncompromising appl-
ication of democratic values and ideology to all spheres of life. His poli-
tical understanding was the same as that of the other section of the
intelligentsia. Like many of his contemporaries, he felt relieved that the
1857 struggle was defeated:
Phule repeated much of the nationalists' economic critique of British
rule. Unlike some of the later non-Brahman leaders who maintained
an unqualified loyalty to the Raj, he seems to have viewed it as
largely destructive in economic terms; it was only on cultural
grounds that he saw it as providing a foundation for the liberation
of the masses. Thus he linked peasant poverty to the ruin of Indian
crafts by unfair competition with British goods, to the disastrous
growth of population, to home charges and the expense of foreign
military campaigns to the excessive spending on fat salaries for
bureaucrats. He described with scorn the decadent life-style of
British officials and their neglect of the peasants and noted that even

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN WESTERN INDIA 87

the common British soldier lived like an aristocrat at the

the masses. Like the nationalists, he viewed the 'bureauc
primary enemy of the peasants-but where he differe
nationalists was in seeing the bureaucracy as a whole, led
by the British but dominated at other levels by the nati
elite. In fact one of his major criticisms of the British
leading their pleasure-seeking life, they acquiesced i
dominance. In every department-education, irrigation, th
Brahmans were seen as monopolizing the benefits of ru
cular, the exploitation of the peasants by the incompeten
judiciary was heavily attacked. While nationalists cri
'drain' of income from India to England, Phule and such
of his as Bhalakar directed their attention to the 'drain' from the
peasantry to the urbanized bureaucratic elite, and criticised such
taxes as the octroi, which provided a major amount of municipal
income and the local fund, by means of which largely upper-caste
students were educated at the expense of the peasantry (p. 118)
Where he sharply differed from the other sections was his uncom-
promising war on the Hindu social structure. His championship of untou-
chables, his ruthless attack on Brahman domination, his exposure of the origin of
castes, the Aryan doctrine, his demand for complete equality, his demand that
Muslims and Christians be treated on terms of equality, his demand for education
for the lowest, and his insistence on equality between men and women, constituted
a thorough declaration of war on the old hierarchical order. This was a far
more radical programme for equality and unity than the Lucknow
Hindu-Muslim Pact or the Gandhian National Unity Programme.
Although the originator of the programme did not realise it, it could be achieved
only by a revolutionary liquidation of the feudal landed relations in India and the
colonial rule. He considered that the main instruments of realising the
programme were the spread of education and enlightenment, anti-caste
consciousness, and the fight against Brahman domination and against
the monopoly of advance under the British rule by the upper castes. It
was not accidental that the later day non-Brahman leaders lost their
fervour for the programme, because they realised that they could not
indulge in the pastime of preaching abolition of castes without chang-
ing the land monopoly of the dominant castes and classes in the
villages.

Two Trends in the Democratic Revolution

Ideologically Jyotiba's programme was a consistent application of demo-

cratic values to Hindu society. In other words, it was an uncompromising
attack on the ancient and feudal superstructure based on feudal land
relations. Here was the big contrast between the upper-caste intelligent-
sia and Jyotiba the former allied itself with indigenous reaction and its
feudal base and superstructure while attacking the British, the latter

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
88 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

took an uncompromising stand against the superstructure a

its demolition. In somewhat more favourable circumstances, this
the latter to challenge the basic agrarian relations. The com
uncompromising trends in a democratic revolution always c
as they did here. The participants had their own subject
ness of fighting a struggle between Brahmans and non-Br
deep historical forces were at work and the tendency t
with feudalism clashed with the uncompromising trend wh
itself as wholesale opposition to the caste system and d
round liberation. (The author commits the mistake com
non-Marxists of judging the development in terms of
consciousness of the participants). With the passage of
growing grip of opportunism, the earlier form of anti-Br
tion becomes its real content. Satyashodhak becomes the n
movement, resulting in compromise both with feudal
imperialism. The new intelligentsia, nurtured among the non-Br
product of Western education, gives exact weight, acts as a bourg
sia, gives up the pioneer's uncompromnising principles, merges ins
to head its ministries, suppressess the people, and keeps the castes in
is a historical law. The intelligentsia springing, further, f
oppressed communities sooner or later accepts the framew
geois democracy, satisfies itself with a general declarat
leaving the mass in lurch. No one directed more conce
against the Congress leaders and their hypocrisy than Am
yet he was one of the main architects of the Indian Consti
by the Congress till recently as the last word in democrac
which the untouchables houses are burnt, their homes
wives raped and they are murdered. No wonder Ambedkar
cheated.
The author does not understand the class process, is unable to view
the different trends in terms of the main problems of Indian revolution,
this whole process of a nation in the making, as she deals only with
ethnic groups and non-Brahmans.

Jedhe and Javalkar

Her discussion of Jedhe and Javalkar, the role they were playing
together and the differentiation between them, is illuminating and yet
she fails to draw important conclusions. Jedhe and Javalkar, the ackno-
wledged leaders of the non-Brahman movement, both joined the national
anti-imperialist movement led by the Congress, fed up with the pro-
British policies of other non-Brahman leaders. Apart from the restlessness
of the peasant masses, both were feeling the anti-imperialist patriotic
urge. They tried to combine their radical anti-casteism with the anti-
British struggle. From non-Brahman leaders, they became national
leaders. And they now had to part company. Joining the Congress

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN WESTERN INDIA 89

meant verbal pyrotechnics against caste and accommodation t

practice. Jedhe was satisfied with it; like the rest of the inte
he adopted a compromising attitude on the question, which in
meant a compromise on the question of agrarian relations.
But Javalkar, that restless mind, would not. To turn to n
manism after the 1930 struggle was impossible. To go forward
must take on an uncompromising position on every iss
capitalism, imperialism-and combine the anti-caste strugg
direct championing of the peasant and the anti-imperialist str
reality, this was the destination, the fulfilment, of Jyotiba's
which neither Gandhi nor any nationalist leader was capable o
the working class, or those remaining loyal to the peasant, co
Javalkar talked of a peasant raj, against capitalism; of ind
peasant organisation; of the Russian Revolution; and a non
peasant army.
Repeatedly, this conflict has arisen in the course of the national
struggle-the conflict against compromise with feudal reaction and also
with imperialism. Those leaders who were absorbed in the intelligentsia
accepted the compromise, those who consistently remained loyal to the
masses were logically led to support the agrarian movement and later on
the working class movement.

Communist and Non-Brahman Movements

The chapter on the Communists and non-Brahmans is written

without the minimum attempt to gather facts. It was a public matter
that by that time the non-Brahman leaders, in Bombay at least, had
taken an openly anti-Communist position under the plea of fighting
Brahman leadership. It was not known to the public that some of them
privately celebrated the arrest of Communists in the Meerut Conspiracy
case. It was also public knowledge that an open attempt was made to
split the GKU because the hammer and sickle was inscribed on the badges
of union volunteers. Is it laziness or just reliance only on non-Brahman
sources?
Certain other facts must also be noted. The non-Brahman leaders
in Bombay had taken the position of openly supporting the British and
the Simon Commission, and described the working class protest against
the Commission as exploitation by Brahman leaders. The clash came at
a time when the non-Brahman movement was revealing its reactionary
features. It should also be remembered that in the early pioneering days
of building the radical trade union movement, the main attack of the
anti-Communist force was delivered through the non-Brahman leaders
of Bombay and it had to be counteracted.
A victim of the caste theory, a victim of the elite theory, the
author persists in calling the leaders Brahmans and their imaginary or
real mistakes are traced to their caste origin. It would be as bad if we

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
90 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

were to treat her errors about us as due to the influence of PL 480

funds!
But from where does she get the idea that the Communists we
opposed to mill committees or afraid of them? The fact is that it is
communist leadership which established mill committees in all the tex
mills in pursuance of its aim to develop rank and file leadership.
establishment of these committees figured as a charge and evidence
the Meerut Conspiracy case. It is known that the 1929 strike was for
on the union and its leaders because of victimisation of the mill committees
and the leaders did their best to protect them. The entire testimony of
the leaders before the Court of Inquiry shows how they defended them.
But the author has no compunction in accepting anything about the
Communists if it fits in with the Brahman elite theory. For anti-Commu-
nist judgements, any foreign author and any anti-communist leader is
good enough. While the author glosses over the enormity of the non-
Brahman leaders' collaboration with the British, their support to the
Simon Commission, she easily quotes some of them to describe
the Communists as "Brahman Communists." She does not even ponder
to think that in most cases the attack was made because the Communists
refused to subordinate the anti-imperialist struggle to the demands of
caste politics. The Communists were scoring successes with the same
masses which the caste leaders wanted to tackle; they were drawing them
into the anti-imperialist struggle which the collaborating leaders wanted
to denigrate. Gail Omvedt's failure to relate all the movements to the
basic movements of the Indian masses against the colonial order again
and again makes her accept the narrow outlook of some of the collabora-
ting non-Brahman leaders.
And then she carries this Brahman analysis business to farcical
length. One of the reasons why the Communists in Andhra made spect-
acular advance was because the main leaders including Sundarayya,
were non-Brahmans, Sundarayya is described as a Reddy; in Kerala,
E M S Namboodiripad was matched by AK Gopalan, who is described
as an Ezhava! The Andhra Communists emerged out of the non-Brahman
movement and not out of the anti-imperialists movement! Then they
lapsed in "Kulak Communism". The Communists are again charged
with not giving satisfactory support to the RIN Mutiny, while the fact
that they called a huge general strike in support is deliberately suppres-
sed. The fact is that the Communists were in constant touch with the
RIN rebels and they alone stood by them and had the courage to call a
general strike and bring the workers in the streets. Truth seems to be of
no value when Communists are to be criticised. What else can one exp-
ect from a book which is only a slightly revised version of a thesis acce-
pted by California University?
The Communist Party and movement had its own shortcomings,
faults and deviations and this is not the place to discuss them. When

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN WESTERN INDIA 91

the author discusses why the movement developed in s

not in Bombay she should have made a deeper analysis,
gling with the categories of Brahman and non Brahman
munists everywhere arose out of the anti-imperialist str
they were able to attract or combine with other demo
left democrats from the Congress, the State people'
anti-caste agitations and peasant movements-they were
their base. The process of absorption of these currents
mutual approach, a correct approach on the part of the
a radical anti-imperialist approach on part of the anti-
In Kerala especially, this took place on a big scale an
went ahead. In Andhra, the Communists took up the
Maharashtra, as we have seen, it was only Javalkar wh
on a radical basis and his activities would have led to a
mation of the two currents.

Revisionist Theory

The failure to relate the flow and ebb of the non-Brahman move-
ment to the development of the national struggle, to the formatio
process of the nation and the rise of new classes, is inevitable because th
author rejects the Marxist-Leninist understanding of colonialism and
bases herself on new revisions in understanding. A sly revision of
Marxism-Leninism has been going on in the name of discovering a
separate colonial mode of production. The author swallows this revision-
ist outlook and comes to grief. The other reason is, of course, reliance
on Fabian guidance.
There is no doubt that with the domination of colonial powers.
and the growing linking of the colonies with the capitalist world market
certain changes began to take place in the pre-capitalist, feudal or
ancient economic relations in the colonies. For a long time the process
was minimal, especially till the arrival of the national industrial bour-
geoisie on the scene. In the main, imperialism based itself on and
exploited the pre-capitalist relations for its own purpose, modifying them
to the minimum extent. The colonial domination acted as an obstruction
to industrial development by its exploitation of the pre-capitalist relation.
Inspite of its obstruction, certain industrial developments began to
takc place in various countries which led to a conflict between the
colonial power and the national bourgeoisie. The extent of this develop-
ment varied from country to country. It could not, of course, be that the
old precapitalist order could continue exactly as it was, or that the old
feudal or semi-feudal relations could remain exactly in their pre-colonial
form. However, by and large, both during the course of the liberation
struggle and after the liberation struggle, the people had to devote their
attention to the liquidation of these relations before they could unleash
the productive forces of their country.

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
92 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

The discoverers of a new colonial mode of produc

supposed to apply to all colonies, while assessing the
about by colonial rule exaggerate the character of the c
bargain embellish imperialism. Read the following from
we have argued in Chapter2, the basic colonial land
colonial agrarian structure is capitalist and not sem
primary basis of landlord power in a colonial societ
market economy and legal and property relations, and bo
and agricultural labourers (making up a majority in m
rural population) get a primary part of their income fro
labour and thus are at least semi-proletarians" (p.301
early 19th century (Jyotiba's time) feudal relations o
abolished and the capitalist market has captured the
side: The colonial power abolished feudal relations on
be a bigger tribute to imperialism?
It is this non-Marxist-Leninist understanding th
author say at another place, "it (colonial society) disrup
the basis by which old social structures and values had been maintained."
There has been a persistent attempt of late to denigrate the anti-
imperialist freedom movement, and present imperialist rule as a progres-
sive enlightening force. L Collins, and D Lapiere's "Freedom at Mid-
night" is one instance. The author slips into this eulogy of British imperi-
alism, a fruit of the false theory of "plural society."

It is notorious that the British relied on the feudal princes, big

feudal landlords, and the maintenance of feudal subservient relations of
land. This was all the more dominant during Jyotiba's days. But the
Rajas, nobles, chieftains, though they continued to exploit the peasantry
in the feudal way, are declared to be part of the commercial bourgeoisie
because, it seems, they did not perform a political function. Both the
facts and arguments are wrong . The author considers that Jyotiba also
belonged to this commercial bourgeois class, which includes rajas, and
so on. To say that after a quarter or half a century of British rule, the
feudal relations on one hand were not the same as they were is correct.
To say that the basic agrarian system was capitalist under British rule
is just absurd.
It is this wrong understanding-that feudalism survives (since the
early days of colonial rule) in terms only of its cultural forms which
leads to the conclusion that Jyotiba's revolt was just a cultural revolt
and not directly connected with the agrarian relations then obtaining.
This makes it easier to present it as a conflict between ethnic groups.
The understanding of the colonial class structure as presented by the
author under this theory ignores the role of the rising national bourgeo-
sie in a country like India, of its spokesmen, the intelligentsia, who led
India due to the weakness of the proletariat.

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CULTURAL REVOLUTION IN W'ESTERN INDIA 93

Conclusion

To conclude: the non-Brahman movement in Maharashtra, origi-

nally known as the Satyashodhak movement, had a much wider signific-
ance than the subsequent anti-caste movements. It was a consistent app-
lication of democratic norms and values to the entire Hindu social stru-
cture. It demanded, further, equality for Muslims and Christians, att
cked the many gods to replace them by one god. It was in these days
liberation challenge to the entire caste superstructure based on feudal
and semi-feudal, pre-capitalist land relations, it would have been succes
ful only with the abolition of basic land relations and the colonia
order. It was a consistent democratic trend arising from the midst of th
lower order, the peasant castes, and led by a democratic intelligentsia
It violently clashed with the other current led by the intelligentsia spr
nging from the upper castes, Brahmans who, while taking an anti-Britis
stand, pursued a conciliatory or justificatory attitude towards the caste
superstructure. It foreshadowed later conflicts, when the bourgeois nat
onalist leaders were to clash with leaders from the working class and th
peasantry over the question of the peasant problems, or the agrarian
revolution. Subsequently, the non-Brahman movement lost this wide
perspective of thoroughgoing attack on the old superstructure, and lik
the earlier upper caste intelligentsia, took a compromising stand on th
question of abolition of castes. While mouthing the earlier ideology and
condemning the Brahmans, the leading figures strayed into securing a
upper caste status for this or that caste in place of destruction of th
caste system. This deterioration in outlook further led to a race for see-
king patronage and office under the British in the name of fighting Brah-
man monopoly, and temporarily ended in collaborating with the Britis
against the first big national upsurge. The British played a role in side
tracking the movement.
But the democratic traditions of the earlier anti-caste struggle
were not dead. The criticism of caste domination even now had a valid
democratic content. Besides, the peasant mass with whom the move-
ment was linked was being strongly influenced by the national move-
ment. The leaders themselves were feeling this nationalist urge-the sense
of national unity. They merged with the Congress to join the 1930
movement. This coming together of the two currents was inevitable with
the strong appeal of nationalism to the peasant masses under the
compromising national bourgeois leadership of the Congress. The
independent destiny of the movement on the basis of Jyotiba's principles
of an uncompromising attitude to the superstructure, combined with
an equally radical policy towards imperialism and agrarian relations,
could not be fulfilled.

However, Javalkar tried to carry out this fulfillment, attempting to

combine the anti-caste movement with a radical peasant movcmcnt and

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
94 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

anti-capitalist outlook, and came very near the working

But unfortunately, he died early. This was really the lo
of the earlier movement which could have been fulfille
class movement had been mature enough.
All this was really a process of various sections of
awakening to their immediate surroundings and, gradually, b
finding their way into the common stream against imperialism
democray. Many were left out but the process was the major
the entire period. During its course the intelligentsia ste
values, often connected with landed interests also, was ri
sources, castes and communities and gradually merging
a common stand against the masses-on the question of a
tion of abolition of castes and untouchability, on the que
class and capitalism, of anti-imperialist democratic revo
why we find these mergers alliances,and so on at the top
left in lurch. The process of colonial exploitation at the
leading to the formation of new classes at the bottom, t
the agricultural workers and a pauperised peasantry-cre
danger for all vested interests. The non-Brahman movem
and fall cannot be understood in isolation from this
of the context of the struggle against the colonial o
with her many non-class ideas about plural society, elit
colonial structure reduces this process to group conflic
the new classes-the industrial bourgeoisie and their spo
from the struggle-divorces the understanding of the m
its connection with basic feudal and semi-feudal agraria
is unable to explain why the cultural revolution shou
Congress. She underestimates the uige of the national p
and accepts the reasoning on many occasions of the non-
who stayed away from the correct path to collab
British.
Her remarks and estimates on the Communist movement and
its failures and successes are mainly based on the opinions of those who
always attacked the Communists and also bypasses facts. In spite of
this, the author has made several penetrating observations on the non-
Brahman movement, understood its phases, and drawn correct com-
parisons between its various leaders. She has, further, given the biogra-
phical sketches of the earlier leaders which show how these men coming
from the common stock rose to great heights in unfurling the banner of
rebellion against the Brahman dominated society.
B T RANADIVE

This content downloaded from

14.139.213.147 on Tue, 17 May 2022 06:00:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms