INDEPENDENT . . . . . . . . . WIDE SUPPORT 421
Fundamental Differences
There were two fundamental differences between the programme and the policy of the Congress and that of the Independent Labour Party. The Congress wanted to capture the legislatures with a view to destroying the new constitution. The Independent Labour Party, on the other hand, wished to enter the legislatures in order to work that constitution for what it was worth.
The Congress claimed to safeguard the interests of the masses, so did the Independent Labour Party. But, added Dr. Ambedkar, the Independent Labour Party feels that by its very composition the Congress is not free to serve the masses. The Congress is a heterogeneous body composed of the exploiters as well as exploited, and it is quite certain that the exploiters in the Congress will not allow the organisation to work for the massess.
A combination of the exploiters and exploited might be necessary for the purposes of achieving political freedom, but to seek to form a common party consisting of exploited and exploiters for purposes of social reconstruction was to deceive the masses, continued the leader of the Depressed Classes.
Membership of Party
The Independent Labour Party, in Dr. Ambedkar’s opinion did not want to increase its strength in the legislature by admitting anybody and everybody in its fold. The Party wanted to avoid being a collection of heterogeneous elements.
“Confining its membership to persons who accept its programme without reservation and who have on other affiliations,” said Dr. Ambedkar, “the Party has decided to put up fewer candidates for the ensuring elections than it was possible for the party to do.”
Although there was work to be done in the legislatures, in the view of his party there was much more important work to be done outside the legislatures in educating the masses, placing before them the correct ideology and organising them for political action through the legislatures.