422 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
(ii) the substitution of separate electorates.
One of the issues which has embittered the relations between the Hindus and the Scheduled Castes in the political field is the issue of electorate. The Scheduled Castes are insisting upon separate electorates. The Hindus are equally insistent on opposing the demand. To arrive at a settlement on this issue—without which there can be no peace and amity between the Hindus and the Scheduled Castes—it is necessary to determine who is right and who is wrong and whether the opposition is based on rational grounds or is based on mere prejudice.
The grounds which are generally urged against the demand of the Scheduled Castes for separate electorates are :
(i) that the Scheduled Castes are not a minority;
(ii) that the Scheduled Castes are Hindus and therefore they cannot have separate electorates;
(iii) that separate electorates will perpetuate untouchability;
(iv) that separate electorates are anti-national; and
(v) that separate electorates enables British Imperialism to influence the communities having separate electorates to act against the interests of the country.
- Are these arguments valid ?
(i) To say that the Scheduled Castes are not a minority is to misunderstand the meaning of the word ‘minority’. Separation in religion is not the only test of a minority. Nor is it a good and efficient test. Social discrimination constitutes the real test for determining whether a social group is or is not a minority. Even Mr. Gandhi thought it logical and practical to adopt this test in preference to that of religious separation. Following this test, Mr. Gandhi in an editorial under the heading. ‘The Fiction of Majority’ in the Harijan dated 21st October 1939 has given his opinion that the Scheduled Castes are the only real minority in India.
(ii) To argue that the Scheduled Castes are Hindus and therefore cannot demand separate electorates is to put the same argument in a different form. To make religious affiliation the determining factor for constitutional safeguards is to overlook the fact that the religious affiliation may be accompanied by an intense degree of social separation and discrimination. The belief that separate electorates go with separation in religion arises from the fact that those minorities who have been given separate electorates happen to be religious minorities. This, however, is not correct. Muslims are given separate electorates not because they are different from Hindus in point of religion. They are given separate electorates because—and this is the fundamental fact—the social relations between the Hindus and the