Submitted on 18 June, 2019
Extended Comment:
Gidla Sujatha, Ants Among Elephants: An Untouchable Family and the Making of
Modern India, New York: FSG, 2017, 306 pages.
Manumarxism: Chronicles of Dalits in the Brahmo-
Communist Movement in India
Suraj Yengde
Department of African and African American Studies, Harvard University
This is a coming-of-age story about the Kambhams, a genteel Dalit Christian family from
Andhra. It is about their coerced consciousness of being born into an oppressed group—an
untouchable group/as untouchables. Having endured irremovable scars of tragedies and pains,
and carrying sacrifices on their sleeves, this story is about Dalits’ inescapable suffering and their
isolation in the face of oppression. It charts the lives of the privileged who desire to strive for an
egalitarian society, yet still maintain their oppression of others. This book chronicles the multi-
stages in the harsh life of a family. This book shows how, in the spirit of encompassing
revolution, Dalits earnestly work day and night to establish the order of equality so as to escape
their harsh conditions. However, in this quest they end up losing hope in each ideologies that
offer radical transformation. Satyam (SM), also known as K G Satyamurthy, and Manjula,
Satyam’s sister, are the hero and heroine of the book. Satyam is a self-boasting, proud man who
never bothered to learn basics like cooking, shaving, buttoning his own shirt; in short, he had the
air of a “prince”. Manjula on the other hand is a bad ass radical and a forthright, staunch
feminist.
If I had to choose between the two, I would easily vote for Manjula for her indomitable
spirit, caring and nurturing heart is felt throughout the book. A beautiful woman with charismatic
confidence crosses the boundaries of village, district and the state, to get educated in the premier
institutions of India in the Uttar Pradesh region, infamous for its hostility and notoriety against
dark skinned South Indians. Amidst the severe language barriers and caste and gender
hindrances, Manjula doesn’t give up, nor does she cow down to the bullying of the dominant
caste Hindu girls and professors. Concentrating on her studies, she not only excels but becomes
an exemplar. After getting married to a man ten years older than her, Manjula remains
committed to the relationship and to her children. Suffering under the torturous regimen of her
husband’s violence and his loosening morale, Manjula dares to live a life of dignity in spite of
the mountainous barriers heaped on her. She takes care of her job and infants single-handedly in
the most adverse conditions. Her workplace is atrocious. The boss is anti-Dalit and this
multiplies Manjula’s grief. In the absence of her husband and any daycare, Manjula brings up her
three children. The problems at work place, infants and poverty infected with caste-gender
barriers, Manjula braves the odds and bequeaths one of the most important contributions that
goes beyond Satyams’. And it is to be a self-reliant woman who is directing, supporting and
birthing revolution. She lived a life of a revolutionary praxis. Giving her children the parental
1
care, they deserved and enliving their spirits, Manjula becomes a woman, like other Dalit women
who deserves a place in the books of feministic diaries that transcend convoluted forms of
gender ascribed roles. Manjula in many terms represents the Dalit women of today.
The Kambhams have only miseries and torture to share in their life. They are rarely seen
living the life of a normal family. They are constantly on the move. The story begins with
movement of the family from one location to the other. Each place they go they suffer outsiders
and untouchables. Their presence is not appreciated. Even the way they dress invites contempt.
“You untouchable son of a bitch! Who told you that you could wear knickers?” was the reaction
when young Satyam wore knickers over the loincloth deemed appropriate for untouchables. The
simple act of wearing casteless clothes summons violence enacted upon their bodies. In the
passages of mobility, the Kambhams represent the archetypal formation of untouchable
livelihood. This presents Dalits as refugees within their own country.
The state, society, community, and family is up against them. There is no peace and so
much stress that one finds it difficult to survive amidst such torturous life. The mother of SM,
Manjula and Carey dies in infancy. The father, Prasanna Rao abandons his children when the
children most needed a fatherly-parental care. SM turns to laity by not dedicating his time to
studies and instead ponders over the revolutionary dream that compounds his young life.
Constant presence of police, violence, pain, displacements, and irrecoverable debt animates the
story of the Kambham family. Amidst cyclones of torture, how do they still manage to survive?
The answer is found in the familial bonding and sibling-affect that keeps the Kambhams alive.
Carey is out there to help his elder brother SM and provide muscle and confidence whenever
required. Manjula is there to support and take care of her brothers who are deprived of their
motherly love. And SM, alongside dedicating his time to the people’s struggle derives the energy
from the unsheltered love and assurance his receives from his siblings. The sibling affinity is one
of the strongest bonds in the familial condition of untouchables. Similarity of experiences and
nurturing of care has been one of the phenomenal attributes of the untouchables’ life that has
kept them alive and moving ahead.
The reviews of this book in the Indian press are at times helpful and at others scornful.
Had this book not been widely reviewed in the western hemisphere, it would face difficulty
making noticeable remark. Because, caste as an issue would be an everyday “life” for the
dominant caste reviewer to carry on with their active and passive oppression; and not acquire a
“story” status worthy to pay enough attention.
Gidla has a unique descriptive style. It is emotional and arresting. She invites the reader
to feel the sensation of a mother’s tears who lies to her son about taking him to a fair and feeding
with the sweetmeat, and instead is enslaved under the vetti, an abhorrent slave system for
untouchables, in which they must give their first male child to the landlords dora as soon as he
learns to walk and talk. The parents “kissed their son and held him in their arms one last time”
(p. 42, emphasis mine). The flow of tears, embracing the baby for one last time is as close as one
gets to understanding the caste system. This ‘one last time’ has been the fate of slaves across the
geographies.
The dora like landowning groups, which eventually consolidated into a tight caste, grew
2
out of colonial bootlicking and thuggery. The landowning castes in India were originally ass-
kissers to the colonial or the monarchical powers. Their job was to collect revenue and keep
records of lands (farms). The farmers belonged to mostly Shudra and Ati-Shudra class.
Notwithstanding their duty, these employed class of the governing structure opted to enter into
mercantile activities. Setting up shops and offering conveyances alongside loans became their
profit making venture. Loans were the most winsome formula for these overseers to indebt the
original owners of land. And thus, as Gidla puts it, “unable to pay off these debts, the villagers
gave up their land acre by acre. My ancestors, who had cleared and settled the area, were reduced
to working on their old fields as laborers.” Once owners of land, the settled tribes were now
enslaved into the field of overseers who notoriously owned the title of landlords—one who
controls everything on his lands—profits, people and labor.
Ugly Razakaars and the hateful church
Growing up in Nanded, a backward region of Marathwada and ruled by Nizam, we often
heard stories of the riches of Nizam. Having never been colonized by the British, there was less
antipathy towards the British as there was towards Nizam. Nizam was a honor as well as a
crooked reference in people’s description. As it goes, Nizam was the richest king in the world.
The Times magazine had put him on their February 22, 1937 cover.1 I would often think of
Nizam’s wealth being held high by the monarchical and aristocratic class of the world and his
influence over Indian politics. However, in this very kingdom of riches, adored by the world,
families like mine were heaped into inescapable marginalization. The elite Mussalmans were
immigrants from the Middle East and from Western Asia who settled as rulers of the land. These
converted Mussalmans carried their caste sensibilities and ensured the system remained intact. I
heard about a conflict in a Muslim neighborhood over marriage. If there is a conflict surrounding
the issue of marriage, it is often Hindu and Muslim. There is a curfew, and law and order is
called to broker peace. These are everyday instances in our regions. However, this time it was
not Hindu-Muslim, but a marriage among the Muslims. Many were confused by this. The
Mussalmans kept the issue confidential, within a small circle so as to not present Islam in bad
light. However, the oppressed caste (Dalit) Muslims revolted and shed light on the heinous caste
system in Marathwada region. Many liberal and radical Muslims had little avenue to express
their secular politics in the hate driven communal politics of India. So it was always a
bipolar argument. If you are Muslim you had to follow the dictums dictated by the Mullahs, if
you chose to do otherwise, social ostracisation was the outcome. In the segregated households of
Muslims, the Nizam pride brimmed as it subscribed to a Pan-Islamic world. The subaltern caste
Muslims who were placed alongside Dalit ghettos had filial spite against the Muslim elites and
as well as the Brahminical Hindu elites.
Nizam’s rule maintained the profligacy of the landlords. It boosted Brahminic Hindu
oppression, and managed to keep the untouchables in the lower positions of civil hierarchies. By
marginalizing the poor converted Muslims, and subsiding the Sikh religion, Nanded became an
epicenter of India’s most flammable communal spots that continues to react to every situation, be
it Dalit violence, Sikh movement, Hindu-Muslim riot, Tribal struggle or the violence against
transgender people.
1
‘The Nizam of Hyderabad, Feb. 22, 1937’, http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19370222,00.html
3
Nizam surrogated casteism, communalism, landlordism, autocracy and Brahmin-Mullah
supremacy. Nizam had patronized subaltern subjectivity. He offered paltry support to the
People’s Education Society (formed by Ambedkar) by offering land and some monetary
assistance. In addition, he opened space for Dalits to occupy positions of power. D Shyamsunder
emerged as one of the most important Dalit leaders of Marathwada region. Nizam’s subaltern
subjects had very little hope, however, his affect crossed seven seas. Viewed within this context,
Gidla’s book reveals intimate experiences under Nizam’s misrule in the Hyderabad kingdom.
Gidla’s story is representative of colonial modernity and its effects in the lives of the
marginalized. Although, we often hear the benefactor of colonial progressivism being the native
elites who compounded the benefits by acquiring the master’s language, culture and religion to
ascend into the hierarchies of local position. The cases of Gandhi, Mandela, Nkrumah, Fanon,
speak to this rationale. However, what stands out different in the case of subaltern caste groups
in India is their determined double-fight: against caste and colonial oppression. Thus, their
struggle for the equal rights and recognition marks a moment of colonized anti-colonial
movement.
The imperial powers supported by the church operated effectively to quell the early
rebellion against the colonial oppression. The missionary efforts in the empire were focused to
enhance the spiritual-economic dualism of the colonized life. The church did not rebel against
the caste system, rather it accommodated the “local customs” by providing a solid ground for the
perpetration of caste system. Given its influence and control—as part of the extended imperial
authority, the church became accomplice in promoting the casteist dogma and remained another
shadow of Brahminical system.
Gidla’s family conversion to Christianity offered them higher status and an escape from
the everyday horrendous ritual based caste system. At least their families were not slaughtered
for daring to enter the temples, or not summoning expensive Brahmin to their ceremonies. Thus,
an upper rank of being a Christian over a Hindu untouchable added with modest English
education gave Dalit Christians an upper hand. By the virtue of their access to English language
and church networks, Christian untouchables could have been, by default the leaders of the anti-
caste movement. However, we do not come across any such names as towering as Ambedkar, N
Sivaraj, Mangu Ram Mugowalia, among the Dalit Christians. In effect, Dalit Christianity
inserted readymade tactics of escapade by shunning their morale to the diluent inferiority.
Christianity exposed the untouchables to a malleable modernity. To the least, they could
have records of their ancestry. Many working-class untouchables in India do not own a paper
neither have oral memories of their ancestors’ history and their past. On the other hand,
Christianity also maintained strong ties to parochial conservatism. Manjula had to suffer in spite
of her accomplishments and qualifications to get a good job. The Christian institutions had odds
with Manjula going to movies and being a communist. Same treatment was met with Satyam
who was bitterly harassed for his communist activities by the catholic institutions (254-5).
Political mobility, and Ambedkar’s clairvoyance
Satyam began as a staunch anti-British Congress supporter. Eventually giving up on
4
Gandhi’s looming working style, Satyam remained committed to the militant Congress led by
Shubas Chandra Bose. Then losing out to congress, he drew inspiration from Bhagat Singh, then
again coming back to Congress as a treasurer of Gudivada Youth Congress, finally graduating to
Communist ideology for most part of his life, and towards the end looking into caste politics
closely by drawing inspiration from B R Ambedkar.
As a member of the communist movement, Satyam was committed to the separate
Andhra movement. The separate Andhra state demand along the linguistic lines was in tune with
Ambedkar’s prognosis to the post-partition India. Ambedkar considered the reorganization of
Indian states a much important issue for him to “sleepover in silence”. Ambedkar had strongly
argued for division of larger states into smaller ones for effective governance. In his Thoughts on
Linguistic States written in 1955, Ambedkar had proposed the one language one state formula.
However, he was also in favor of one language multiple states. He had then carved out a formula
of separate states that strike a balance between the majority and minority castes taking into
account the sentiments of the state citizens. He feared the majority-minority complex would put
the minority castes into the hands of tyrannizing majority. In addition, he had suggested
an average population of the state should not exceed to 20 million.
Hyderabad was an important location strategically and culturally. Given the defense line
of action and the geographical placing, Ambedkar had rallied for Hyderabad’s status as a second
capital of India. He had believed that the centrality of Hyderabad was not only a meeting point of
the North and South, but it was also a politically viable option. He had written “Hyderabad has
all the amenities which Delhi has and it is a far better city than Delhi. It has all the grandeur
which Delhi has. I do not see what objection there can be in making Hyderabad a second capital
of India. It should be done right now while we are reorganizing the States…Fortunately, it can be
very easily done with satisfaction to the whole of South India, to Maharashtra and to the
Andhras.”2 He saw this problem as easing the tensions between North and South.
However, the Congress ignored Ambedkar’s formula only to be received with hostility
further down the line by the Andhra people. The issue of division of states on the pointers
suggested by Ambedkar ghosted up. Andhra and Hyderabad agreements to run a co-joint state
failed and separate Telangana agitation rose gaining momentum in the 1960s. Against this
backdrop, we see Satyam rallying for the cause of separate Andhra and later separate Telangana.
The on-ground actions of the community people is well presented in a concise form through the
chapters 2 and 3 in the stories Satyam’s anti-congress, anti-state activities along with the
communist support.
Of the many told incidents and now a folklore, of Andhra state formation, the names of
untouchables are invisible. Thus, making it appear that the Andhra struggle was led
by Manumarxist communists and radicals. The important contribution of the untouchable
peasants and landless wage laborers was important and most volatile one. The foot soldiers of
these movement were fighting for food and a place to put their foot. No material rights came to
the doors of untouchables. After the revolution, the untouchables went to their dungeon and
segregated ghettos laden with discrimination and humiliation. The dominant castelords continued
2
B R Ambedkar, Thoughts on Linguistic States, V Moon (ed.) Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings & Speeches, Vol. 1
(Mumbai: Government of Maharashtra, 2014), p. 171.
5
their enslavement on the control of cane and unaccounted violence. This reminds the warning
given by Ambedkar regarding the failed romanticism of revolution in India. “Men will not join in
a revolution for the equalization of property unless they know that after the revolution is
achieved they will be treated equally and that there will be no discrimination of caste and creed”.
As the promises of new Andhra state dismally failed the Dalits, so did the legendary
history of Andhra untouchables. The popular mass leader of the movement Satyam is an
unknown name. A leader as young as Bhagat Singh was already leading a people’s movement on
the field by gathering subaltern groups through cultural troupes and literary evocations. At the
age of 21 Satyam emerged as an influential leader of the separate Andhra agitation.
Therefore, read this work for calling spade a spade. Read this treatise to experience
the wrath and unapologetic, straight forward, no-nonsense talk of a Dalit woman, if you haven’t
felt yet. Dalit woman, in our popular imagination is a subservient, modular and bended character
who is there to please your sense, desires and lust. She is a victim often in tears. She is your
maid, bai, kaamwali, shit cleaner, aaya, sharecropper, laborer on construction site and a help.
Although sometimes misjudging the character of intra-caste relations and thereby loud
mouthing the personage of the caste system, Gidla’s powerful voice is still undeniable and it is
surely going to blow your sense. So, read, if you are in denial, if you are in support, against, a
comrade or a nemesis of the profoundly equipped self-loving Dalit movement. This book is a
welcome addition to the genre of Dalit literature that modernizes love and culture of revolution.
A rich repository of vernaculars, religion and culture it is a go-to book for scholars from
multi-disciplines. It is a sophisticated work of art, rich with narratives drawn from ethnography,
participant observation, structured and semi-structured interviews. With the detailed researched
references of historical incidents and taking from personal testimonies of majority of the actors
discussed in the book, the author is seen committed to the project of unraveling the political
position of untouchables in contemporary India. This book therefore, is a political treatise. This
book could well be a political treatise. It deserves a serious treatment and equally disciplined
reflection.
Revolutionary Casteism
The caste Communists are notoriously known to harbor strongest casteist sentiments in
the movement and beyond. Even in the revolutionary praxis, the Dalits are termed as the lowest
of the low vanguards. Communists like the Congress party has been an anti-Dalit establishment
since its inception. In the West Bengal where Communists ruled the state, their anti-Dalit politics
conveniently excluded the Dalit leadership. Alongside Congress, the Communists of West
Bengal brutally suppressed the ideal political leadership of the Dalits in the state, Jogendranath
Mandal. Mandal was promised an electoral support as allies, however, no one except Dalit voted
for Mandal. It was later revealed that communist cadres were actively told to not vote to Mandal.
Similarly, as described in this book, the Dalit cadres of the People’s War Group (PWG)
complained about casteist experiences they suffered at the hands of fellow comrades in the
revolution. The young untouchable cadres were assigned the duties according to their caste.
6
Untouchables did the filthiest job of cleaning the lavatories, the barber castes were told to shave
the hairs, washer caste member to clean the clothes, thereby creating a protected revolutionary
varnsharma dharma. The untouchables drafted themselves into the Naxalite movement to
precisely fight against this tyrannical system. The caste was the main reason for their oppressive
life. Therefore, when they attacked temples, they attacked the institution that spit on them for
daring to enter, they attacked Komati (money lender) because that was the reason for their
indebted life. They wanted to annihilate caste system for once and all. However, their radical
urge was misdirected into fighting against an imagined capitalist class that could only be
resolved with Marx’s Europe-centric indoctrination.
The growing numbers of “upper” caste sympathizers who joined the movement cherished
an image of utopia. However, when they entered the movement they were not told to fight
against the prejudices of caste. The issues of caste as an important problematic factor was not
encouraged to discuss. It was totally shunned. “Talk of caste feeling inside the party had always
been taboo” (302). Instead the toilers were encouraged to “fight for the demands of the whole
class, not for those of particular groups” (305). This created a huge vacuum and it is difficult to
fill now. The party which was anti-capitalist was anti-Dalit too. They rarely supported Satyam’s
radical activities even though he was often considered by the party leadership as an untouchable
cadre placed on the margins.
Given these circumstance India can never have a desired subaltern revolution. The
revolution designed within the mandates of bourgeois framework of neoliberalism is talking
point of the liberal elites. This the perhaps one of the stronger reasons that revolution remains a
distant dream and unable to sprout in recent times. The reason varies: revolution is a
romanticized idea, revolution for self and not for everyone, and revolution as a way of life than a
given state of order. Many dominant caste Hindus who preferred to opt a radical move did not
shed their biases and pungent discriminatory attitudes. Thus, their adoption to Maoism was not
centered around camaraderie. It was centered around varnasharma dharma giving rise the
chaturvarna (caste system) in the hierarchy of revolution. The caste Maoist became Hindu
Maoists and Hindu comrades or Hindu Marxists reinvigorating caste-based sensibilities. S A
Dange, a foremost Brahmin communist leader had advocated Vedanta and justified caste system
as a “necessity of divison of labor” matching Marx with Krishna for advocating a philosophy of
economic determination. This is what happens when an imported product is nativized. An ugly
imagery of profound stupidity is presented as a revolutionary model without base and structure.
One of the benefits of being a Brahmin in the communist movement was to ascribe to the
personal philosophies of religion and caste. Dange like many dominant castes did not
relinquished their caste accretion and continued with amassing their spiritual privileges for their
own advantage. Oxymoronically they saw Marxism in “the Vedas and the Bhagwat Gita”.3 It is
to the Brahmin and other dominant caste Indian communism, there has been no real effective
change let alone revolution on the ground. The contempt of the toiling masses, the Dalits and
backward classes towards Indian communism is not towards the ideology but towards the caste
laden leadership who is responsible for their suffering in the caste society.
3
Teltumbde Anand, ‘Bridging the Unholy Rift’, in Ambedkar B R India and Communism (New Delhi: LeftWord
Books, 2017), p. 48
7
Revolution was sold as a utopian dream and everyone was excited to file the ranks in the
troops. However, they were not as committed as Satyam. The ones who went into armed struggle
shamelessly left the battle in the middle when reality hit like that shit hitting fan. When they left
the movement, they had properties to take care of or jobs to attend. Many flew into the cushy
comforts of America using their caste networks abandoning the comrades on field. As the leaders
in the ML movement came from “upper” caste, petty bourgeois strata that had joined the
movement during the student days from elite/urban institution.”4 Comrades like Satyam who
were Dalits were deprived of this falling back upon something opportunity. Dalits run the social
and political movement with penury at home. Since, their life was a testament of living
revolutionary praxis, they did not find it necessary to turn back as they had nothing to fall on.
Same huts, same slum, same poverty, same oppression and common death!
The extremely hypocritical form of communism is in operation ever since it was led,
directed and appropriated by the caste Hindu communists—most of them Brahmins. During one
of the election rallies in Telaprolu, a landlord stops the rally and demands the return of paleru
(bonded labor). The communist simply returned the paleru without hesitation to his landlord
against which they were holding their rally. Satyam was a frontal man of the rally carrying the
red flag of the party. Upon noticing this incident Satyam intervenes and questions the party
cadres. But he fails to raise an alarming protest over such anti-Dalit behavior of the communists.
In this act, Satyam conveniently fit himself into the party structures and joined the ranks of many
Dalits of the revolutionary movement who silently allowed caste to function. Similar examples
could be cited from elsewhere wherein the oppressed caste folks were assimilated into the
dysfunctional strategy of the communist movement. Malayapuram Singaravelu Chettiar, himself
gained the moniker of “Godfather of the Indian Labour” was a giant leader from Tamil Nadu
who worked with the likes of Ayothee Dasa Panditar as a Buddhist and Periyar EVR Naicker as
a radical rationalist alongside Gandhian Congress before joining the communist movement.
Teltumbde describes Singaravelu’s position in the communist party as someone who
chose to concentrate on the theoretical dimensions of Marxism meaning conservative reading of
economic variances by overlooking the social structures of caste and untouchability.
Singaravelu’s position as someone who comes from fishermen caste comes as surprise when he
had relative experience of caste as opposed to his Brahmin counterparts in the party. Teltumbde
notes that CPI could influence the likes of Singaravelu to avoid caste in his approach in the
struggle for social justice. If this is an indication of anything, Teltumbde asks one could only
guess the take of Brahmin leaders who were primarily voices the CPI.5 Like Singaravelu,
Teltumbde cites another Dalit CPI activist Jiban Dhubi who incarcerated for 11 years for his
activism with CPI was termed as a “scheduled caste comrade” clearly drawing a fine line of caste
ascription. In his searing critique, Teltumbde shows how the communists saw the emergence of
Ambedkar as a threat to their leadership. They defiled his personality by calling him names and
declaring him an imperialist supporter, and anti-worker, when in fact Ambedkar had organically
shown communism in practice. Citing overwhelming anecdotes, Teltumbde’s proposition
suggests that communists in India who were more interested in a creed version of Marx than
Marxism, were united with the Hindu zealots in their abusive tirade against Ambedkar. The
4
Ajay Gudavarthy, ‘Dalit and Naxalite Movements in AP: Solidarity or Hegemony?’,
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 40, No. 51 (Dec. 17-23, 2005), p. 5413.
5
Teltumbde Anand, ‘Bridging the Unholy Rift’. p. 38
8
communist who could have looked up to Ambedkar as a natural ally, like other communist
movements in the colonized world did by allying with respective progressive ideologies.
However, the casteist gaze did not considered Ambedkar equal enough. The Brahmin communist
even went further ahead by splitting the Scheduled Caste votary by fielding candidates against
Ambedkar’s party. In a very congress-que passion, the communist proved once again that they
were Brahmins first— “the chief political and intellectual leaders”6 and communist second.
Ambedkar’s academic and as well as socio-political resume was by far the most suitable
as far relating to the philosophy of communism was considered—due to this exposure to the
early years of Marxism discussed in the academic circles in the west, and his position as
someone being from the oppressed community who centralized the cause of labor in the
parliamentary politics. However, the communist did not consider Ambedkar’s quality as that of
revolutionary. Instead they were mired with historically congenital practices of caste supremacy
and thus with that lens at disposal, Ambedkar was a damned as a wretched Dalit. By detailing
these pitfalls within the communist movement, Teltumbde conclusively shows the mirror to the
casteist Brahmin class who paraded as communists.
Taking from the historical evidences from Dalit communist’s mistreatment, and their
meeting with closed encounters of casteism, Satyam like many Dalit communists have now
given up the isolated position of “class war” to a “revolutionary program” of caste-class war. The
fate of Satyam from being a mainstream communist leader to becoming a neglected anti-caste-
class leader is indicative of many Dalit experiences in the communist movement in India.
Satyam was heckled as “Naqli Marxist” (phony Marxist) by Hindu Marxists in the struggle.
Many Dalits who chose to go with the arms struggle faced two armies to fight and two enemies.
First being the caste army and second, the state. A towering figure like comrade Satyam who
conspired a revolutionary struggle against the state only fell on feet to see his comrades giving
up on him. By avoiding the question of caste, Satyam became an archetypal token Dalit figure
who could be spotted lingering in any non-Dalit movements as an untouchable who is used and
tossed out whenever needed. Due to the revolutionary casteism, many post-Naxalite Dalit leaders
and their families expressed a deep-seated hatred against the communist movement. While
during their work in the party, the Dalits in the struggle were identified as Dalit Marxists, and the
ones who decided to leave and form a new coalition were ostracized. One such case is of two
former leaders of the PWG and he UCCRI (M) who started a journal Edureet and established
Marxist-Leninist Center. In spite of its central focus on Marxism and Leninism, none of the ML
parties gave it a recognition.
The Dalit valor and loyalty is diluted from appropriate struggles and instead diverted into
the struggles of others but sold as their own. After comrade Satyam was expelled for his anti-
caste stand, it proved that the communists, rights wing, centrist or the socialists everyone is
intimidated seeing the rising consciousness among Dalits. Carrying this bitter experience,
Satyam launched a Samatha Volunteer Force in 1991.7 The objective were clear: “The SVF will
be a youth army to counter attacks made on Dalits Samatha Volunteer Force” a tit-for-tat
6
S A Dange commented against Ambedkar’s first civil rights march in Mahad. Ibid. p. 49
7
Amarnath K Menon, ‘Top Naxals woo Dalits to split People's War Group’,
https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/indiascope/story/19911115-top-naxals-woo-dalits-to-split-peoples-war-group-
815083-1991-11-15
9
response. Satyam became widely appreciated in the circles of Dalits in Andhra for his
commitment to caste issues.
In his later years, the PWG’s pro-Dalit stand especially in the wake of 1985 Dalit
massacres by the rich Kamma farmers in Karamchedu massacre brought forth a mixed wave of
reaction among Dalits. The PWG guerilla physically eliminated the main accused responsible for
the Karamchedu massacre, however, the pamphlet it released after the massacre failed to
recognize it as an issue of caste violence. It instead subverted to it being a landlord-laborer
dispute squaring it into the brackets of class struggle. The Dalit leaders protested against such
formation. They framed it an attack by the “kamma landlords” on “madiga coolies” by asserting
the palpable caste reason. Following the events of 1985, conscious Dalit intellectuals and
Naxalites started getting hold of Ambedkar and they formed Dalit Mahasabha, an organization
that radicalized Ambedkar’s revolutionary thought into action. They decided to fight the
oppression through legal means. Such move proved an anti-CPI Marxist-Leninist and Naxalite
position by the new wave of the Ambedkarite Dalits who committed to “new Dalit democratic
revolution.” Ambedkar’s definition of democracy meant, “a form and method of government
whereby revolutionary changes in the economic and social life of the people are brought about
without bloodshed”.8 The Manifesto of the Dalit Mahasabha (DMS) declared its primary
objective “to annihilate the untouchability and caste system which are impeding their solidarity
and along with preparing them to annihilate socio-economic inequalities.”9 The PWG criticized
Dalits for abandoning the revolutionary mandate.
The Ambedkarite politics in the Telugu belt dabbled with the Naxalite movement as an
ally and at times seeing it as a representative of the caste hierarchy they were fighting against.
However, a solidarity amongst these ideologies continued where the DMS journal Nalupu started
to air their concerns against the state for its fake counters and ban on PWG. And Edureet seek to
actively open up dialogues between the Naxalites and Ambedkarites. The agenda was set to
redistribution of land on the basis of caste and ascent of Dalits and descend of the dominant
castes from the party leadership. This coupled with the Chunduru massacre of 1991 that brutally
killed 10 Dalits. Against this background angry Dalits committed to “Dalit only” leadership.
This confidence emerged out of the national level wave of Bahujan politics led by the
charismatic anti-caste organizers who floated an unbelievable caste-centric politics on a national
level, Kanshiram. Kanshiram’s Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), a widely popular political party
gained acceptability among diverse Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward
Classes. This attempt to forge a unity among the classes who were up against each other was
welcoming to the neo Dalit Andhra leadership. The Bahujan politics gained momentum in the
DMS leadership who sought to work closely with BSP that offered a collective unity of the
oppressed classes to fight against the caste-based oppression under a common identity of
Bahujan. Since BSP came with a huge social base and political coinage, it became a natural ally
to the radical Ambedkarite political leadership. The rise of BSP was compared with the ML’s
failed efforts to bring about a revolution. It was stated that BSP’s ascent to the throne would
bring about Indianized democratic revolution.
8
Keer, Dhananjay. Dr. Ambedkar: Life and Mission. Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 2016, p. 445
9
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/17193/13/13_appendices.pdf
10
However, in spite of rich radical caste politics base in the Andhra belt, the legendary
leaders of the Scheduled Caste Federation like Bhagya Reddy Verma, B Venkata Rao, J. H.
Subayya, Shaymsunder who came out as towering figures in the Depressed Classes movement.
And the later figures of the post-independence era like Bojja Thakaram, Kathi Padma Rao find
no reference, neither recognition of such giants in Gidla’s work.
We need to amplify the voices that align to the current interests. The current is an
extension of a long and unattended struggle of the history. Gidla abruptly ends the book without
giving hints to the situation of SM’s post-communist party caste politics. She also does not give
us enough to ponder upon the experiences of SM as a radical anti-caste leader. Ambedkar and his
influence on the political scene of Telugu states and on SM is also not represented. Ambedkar, as
a political radical only finds mention towards the tail end, in the last paragraph. Satyam’s loyal
friend and a fearless radical, Nancharayya who accompanied Satyam on cultural troupes and
unfurled the black flag on tehsildar’s office alongside Satyam during separate Andhra agitation.
Nancharayya is an Ambedkarite who gauged the politics of the oppressed castes under the
influence of Ambedkar. SM’s book on Ambedkar titled “Ambedkar Suryudu—Ambedkar, the
Sun” does not find mention in the book which was a response to the casteist Hindu Marxists’
abuse of the revolutionary movement of the Dalits.10
Every oppressed writing is an outcome of social movement. Thus, it is a social product.
We would hope that Gidla takes on the mantle of educating and leading the struggle of modern
untouchables in western space where she is now based. Her leadership and courageous
representation will only add strength to the anti-caste movement.
February, 2018
References:
Ambedkar B R, Thoughts on Linguistic States, V Moon (ed.) Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings &
Speeches, Vol. 1, Mumbai: Government of Maharashtra, 2014.
Bharathi, Thummapudi, A History of Telugu Dalit Literature, New Delhi: Kalpaz, 2008.
Dalel Benbabaali, ‘From the peasant armed struggle to the Telangana State: changes and continuities in a
South Indian region’s uprisings,’ Contemporary South Asia, 24:2, 2016, 184-196, DOI:
10.1080/09584935.2016.1195340
Gudavarthy Ajay, ‘Dalit and Naxalite Movements in AP: Solidarity or Hegemony?’,
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 40, No. 51 (Dec. 17-23, 2005), pp. 5410-5418
Navayan Karthik, ‘Sathyamurthy: People’s Poet and Leader Who Lived and Died Among the People’,
https://roundtableindia.co.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6481:sathyamurthy-
people%E2%80%99s-poet-and-leader-who-lived-and-died-among-the-people&catid=129&Itemid=195
Teltumbde Anand, ‘Bridging the Unholy Rift’, in Ambedkar B R India and Communism (New Delhi:
LeftWord Books, 2017), pp. 9-78
Varshney Ashutosh, Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in Indi, Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2002.
Waghmore Suryakant, Civility against Caste: Dalit Politics and Citizenship in Western India, New
Delhi: Sage Publications, 2013.
10
Karthik Navayan, ‘Sathyamurthy: People’s Poet and Leader Who Lived and Died Among the People’,
https://roundtableindia.co.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6481:sathyamurthy-
people%E2%80%99s-poet-and-leader-who-lived-and-died-among-the-people&catid=129&Itemid=195
11
