{"title":"预见民主多数主义的威胁:安贝德卡论宪法设计与意识形态批判,1941-1948","authors":"Rahul Govind","doi":"10.1177/23210230231166196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses B. R. Ambedkar’s works written between 1941 and 1948, and it discerns a central set of concerns and arguments in this otherwise diverse corpus. It argues that since universal franchise as a political principle is uncontroversial, Ambedkar’s primary concern is geared towards the danger of democratic majoritarianism in a society riven by historically, legally and ideologically determined forms of inequality and their logic—a danger that can only be addressed at the dual levels of institutional design and ideological critique. Reading together Pakistan or the Partition of India and What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables, the initial sections argue that Ambedkar was critical of Congress and Muslim league politics because he saw in them both, albeit in distinct ways, the affirmation of religious identity as central to the formulation of political identity. Such an orientation, in the actual mechanics of mass politics and constitutional negotiation, is therefore read as inevitably leading to conflicts including demands for Partition, but at the same time such politics avoided fundamental questions of internal critique and instituted forms of socialized inequality. It is in this context, and the imminence of Partition, that the article analyses Ambedkar’s argument for the need of both a specific institutional design (constitutional provisions) and an ideology critique (his historical research including Who were the Sudras and The Untouchables). The analysis of the demand for partition and the category of the minority can only be understood through Ambedkar’s acute historical and theoretical understanding of the nation and its history, as well as the normative demands required for institutional justice, as will be shown through a reading of this corpus.","PeriodicalId":42918,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Indian Politics","volume":"11 1","pages":"66 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anticipating the Threat of Democratic Majoritarianism: Ambedkar on Constitutional Design and Ideology Critique, 1941–1948\",\"authors\":\"Rahul Govind\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23210230231166196\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article analyses B. R. Ambedkar’s works written between 1941 and 1948, and it discerns a central set of concerns and arguments in this otherwise diverse corpus. It argues that since universal franchise as a political principle is uncontroversial, Ambedkar’s primary concern is geared towards the danger of democratic majoritarianism in a society riven by historically, legally and ideologically determined forms of inequality and their logic—a danger that can only be addressed at the dual levels of institutional design and ideological critique. Reading together Pakistan or the Partition of India and What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables, the initial sections argue that Ambedkar was critical of Congress and Muslim league politics because he saw in them both, albeit in distinct ways, the affirmation of religious identity as central to the formulation of political identity. Such an orientation, in the actual mechanics of mass politics and constitutional negotiation, is therefore read as inevitably leading to conflicts including demands for Partition, but at the same time such politics avoided fundamental questions of internal critique and instituted forms of socialized inequality. It is in this context, and the imminence of Partition, that the article analyses Ambedkar’s argument for the need of both a specific institutional design (constitutional provisions) and an ideology critique (his historical research including Who were the Sudras and The Untouchables). The analysis of the demand for partition and the category of the minority can only be understood through Ambedkar’s acute historical and theoretical understanding of the nation and its history, as well as the normative demands required for institutional justice, as will be shown through a reading of this corpus.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42918,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Indian Politics\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"66 - 84\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Indian Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23210230231166196\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Indian Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23210230231166196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Anticipating the Threat of Democratic Majoritarianism: Ambedkar on Constitutional Design and Ideology Critique, 1941–1948
This article analyses B. R. Ambedkar’s works written between 1941 and 1948, and it discerns a central set of concerns and arguments in this otherwise diverse corpus. It argues that since universal franchise as a political principle is uncontroversial, Ambedkar’s primary concern is geared towards the danger of democratic majoritarianism in a society riven by historically, legally and ideologically determined forms of inequality and their logic—a danger that can only be addressed at the dual levels of institutional design and ideological critique. Reading together Pakistan or the Partition of India and What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables, the initial sections argue that Ambedkar was critical of Congress and Muslim league politics because he saw in them both, albeit in distinct ways, the affirmation of religious identity as central to the formulation of political identity. Such an orientation, in the actual mechanics of mass politics and constitutional negotiation, is therefore read as inevitably leading to conflicts including demands for Partition, but at the same time such politics avoided fundamental questions of internal critique and instituted forms of socialized inequality. It is in this context, and the imminence of Partition, that the article analyses Ambedkar’s argument for the need of both a specific institutional design (constitutional provisions) and an ideology critique (his historical research including Who were the Sudras and The Untouchables). The analysis of the demand for partition and the category of the minority can only be understood through Ambedkar’s acute historical and theoretical understanding of the nation and its history, as well as the normative demands required for institutional justice, as will be shown through a reading of this corpus.
期刊介绍:
SIP will publish research writings that seek to explain different aspects of Indian politics. The Journal adopts a multi-method approach and will publish articles based on primary data in the qualitative and quantitative traditions, archival research, interpretation of texts and documents, and secondary data. The Journal will cover a wide variety of sub-fields in politics, such as political ideas and thought in India, political institutions and processes, Indian democracy and politics in a comparative perspective particularly with reference to the global South and South Asia, India in world affairs, and public policies. While such a scope will make it accessible to a large number of readers, keeping India at the centre of the focus will make it target-specific.