Compare and contrast views of Antonio Gramsci and B.R. Ambedkar.
- Gramsci is generally considered as the founder of Eurocommunism whereas the European path of revolution is seen as different from the Russian way to socialism. The decisive moment of the European path is said to be giving predominance to democracy. In other words, the Russian path is considered to be aggressively political whereas the European path is celebrated as a more civilian one. The “civilian” here means more of a path through social and moral consensus, and through constructing a national collective will. Philosophically, the conscious moment occupies a predominant place in comparison to the materialistic economic moment. In this way of interpreting Antonio Gramsci, he is often characterized as a Hegelian and social democrat.
- Ambedkar too is considered as an ideologue who pays primary attention to the democratic revolution in India. Some leftist writers are inclined to see Ambedkar as a caste reformer and social democrat. Ambedkar’s denouncement of violence in the Marxist concept of social revolution and his conversion to Buddhism as a peaceful moral path and finally, the legal means of safe-guarding the rights of the Dalits are seen by some of the scholars as evidencing the democratic spirit of Ambedkar.
- A careful scrutiny of both Gramsci and Ambedkar would reveal that they cannot be characterized merely as advocates of democracy and peaceful transition. On the other hand, the analyses of Gramsci and Ambedkar stand tremendously nearer to the Italian and Indian realities that refuse to sit monolithically within the class essentialism of classical Marxism. The involvement and commitment of Gramsci and Ambedkar to their respective societies made them understand that the classical Marxist concepts were inadequate to comprehend their societies in all their concretness. It is this latter realization that compelled Gramsci and Ambedkar to move intimately into the inner layers of society that contributed to the introduction of fresh concepts about their societies.
- Gramsci and Ambedkar cannot be labeled just as social democrats but they realized that only through a democratic strategy of unifying the multifarious forces of the subaltern realm, the path for a socialist transformation can be moulded. According to them, a revolution should start from the specific conditions of the country. The specificity of Indian society is that it is a traditional one and the caste system occupies the most prominent place in its structure. Hence, a democratic intervention and mobilization addressed to the traditional structures of the society would be the starting point for any revolutionary change in India. In this regard, Ambedkar and Gramsci do not support the concept of stages of revolution but organically united the democratic and socialist stages of Indian revolution.
Next
previous
Latest News
General Studies