Gail Omvedt’s Ambedkar: Towards an Enlightened India is a very insightful and

well-researched biography of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, one of the most influential social

reformers and public intellectuals of modern India. Generally, most of the works view

Ambedkar through the lens of Dalit activism, but Omvedt presents him as a national leader

and a theorist of democracy, justice, and social transformation. She argues that Ambedkar’s

contributions extend far beyond caste politics, and Omvedt presents him as a key architect of

modern India’s constitutional democracy. Through this book, Omvedt challenges the

perception that Ambedkar was merely a Dalit leader. He is presented in this book as a global

thinker whose ideas resonate with contemporary debates on social inequality and justice.

As a sociology student, reading Ambedkar as a contemporary theorist rather than as a

‘Dalit Sociologist’ is crucial. His work engages with issues of power, social stratification, and

institutional inequality. These make his ideas relevant to broader sociological discourse.

Omvedt highlights how Ambedkar’s critique of caste was not just about social

discrimination, but it was also about the systemic structures that sustained hierarchy. He

theorized caster as a system of graded inequality, where social mobility was systematically

blocked through religious and ideological means. In this sense, I can see Ambedkar’s idea

alongside sociological theories of domination, like Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic violence

or Gramsci’s ideas on hegemony.

Moreover, Ambedkar’s challenge to the idea of homogeneous Indian nationalism

places him in conversation with scholars who critique nation-building as an elite-driven

project. His rejection of Brahmanical Hinduism was not merely a call for religious conversion

but an assertion of a different kind of modernity – which prioritizes rationalism, democracy,

and individual rights over traditional social structures. Thus, Ambedkar is relevant for

contemporary debates on secularism, identity politics, and democratic representation.

Overview of the Book

education, political struggles, and intellectual evolution. Ambedkar’s early encounters with

untouchability made him slowly aware of the structural nature of social discrimination

existing then. However, rather than accepting himself as a victim, he pursued education as a

means of liberation. His time at Columbia University and the London School of Economics

played a crucial role in broadening his intellectual horizons. He was influenced by Western

liberal thought, socialist critiques of capitalism, and the American discourse on race and

democracy. These influences shaped his vision for an India based on justice, equality, and

fraternity—principles that he saw as essential for true democracy.

The book then moves into Ambedkar’s political activism, focusing on his early

struggles for Dalit rights, including access to public spaces, education, and political

representation. Omvedt provides a detailed account of his conflicts with Gandhi, particularly

over the issue of separate electorates for Dalits. While Gandhi believed in social reform

within the Hindu framework, Ambedkar rejected this entirely and argued that caste

oppression was intrinsic to Hinduism itself. Their ideological differences culminated in the

Poona Pact of 1932, where Gandhi’s opposition forced Ambedkar to compromise on separate

electorates in favour of reserved seats within a joint electorate. Omvedt’s analysis of this

episode is fascinating, showing how the event was both a political setback and a moment that

solidified Ambedkar’s resolve to seek alternative paths for Dalit liberation.

One of the strongest aspects of the book is its discussion of Ambedkar’s economic

thought. Unlike many nationalist leaders who romanticized the Indian village, Ambedkar saw

it as a site of oppression, a den of ignorance. His advocacy for industrialization and

urbanization was rooted in his belief that economic progress was essential for social

transformation. He critiqued both capitalism and Brahmanism, arguing that economic

exploitation and caste hierarchy were deeply interconnected. In this regard, Omvedt draws
interesting parallels between Ambedkar and Marx, though she acknowledges the differences

in their approaches. While Marx saw class struggle as the primary contradiction, Ambedkar

viewed caste as a more fundamental axis of oppression in Indian society.

The final chapters focus on Ambedkar’s role in shaping independent India,

particularly his work on the Indian Constitution. As chairman of the drafting committee, he

ensured that the Constitution included provisions for fundamental rights, social justice, and

affirmative action. However, Omvedt does not portray this as the culmination of his struggle;

instead, she highlights how Ambedkar remained disillusioned with post-independence India.

He saw the dominance of the Congress Party and the persistence of caste discrimination as

major obstacles to true democracy. His eventual conversion to Buddhism in 1956 was a

radical political statement, signaling his final break with Hinduism and his vision for an

egalitarian society.

Omvedt’s book is highly readable and well-structured, making it an excellent

introduction to Ambedkar’s life and ideas. One of its strengths is the way it contextualizes

Ambedkar within global social movements. She draws comparisons between Ambedkar’s

fight against caste oppression and movements against racial discrimination in the United

States, Japan’s Burakumin struggles, and the broader discourse on human rights. Another

important contribution of the book is its critique of the mainstream nationalist narrative.

Omvedt challenges the way Indian history often marginalizes Ambedkar, portraying him as a

secondary figure compared to Gandhi or Nehru. She argues that Ambedkar’s vision of

democracy was far more radical and modern than that of many of his contemporaries. Unlike

Gandhi, who sought to reconcile caste divisions within a Hindu framework, Ambedkar

sought to dismantle the very foundations of caste. Unlike Nehru, who prioritized economic

planning but neglected social justice, Ambedkar saw political, social, and economic justice as

inseparable.
 However, the book has some limitations. While Omvedt does an excellent job of

summarizing Ambedkar’s contributions, she does not engage deeply with some of the more

complex aspects of his thought. For instance, Ambedkar’s critique of nationalism as a

Brahmanical project is mentioned but not fully explored. Similarly, his engagement with

feminist thought and gender justice, particularly in his advocacy for the Hindu Code Bill,

could have been given more attention. Additionally, while she compares Ambedkar with

Marx, she does not fully engage with how his economic vision differed from traditional

socialist models.

Nonetheless, Omvedt’s book is not just a biography; it is an intellectual engagement

with Ambedkar’s ideas. It invites readers to see him not as a figure of the past but as a thinker

whose work continues to challenge existing power structures. For those studying social

sciences, particularly in the context of India, Ambedkar: Towards an Enlightened India is an

indispensable text that provides a critical and thought-provoking perspective on one of

India’s greatest social theorists.

References

Omvedt, G. (2004). Ambedkar: Towards an Enlightened India. Penguin Books India.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard

University Press.

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers.