Appropriation of Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar

Let us talk about the 'appropriation' of Dr. Ambedkar!
Arundhati Roy wrote the introduction of Dr. Ambedkar's 'The Annihilation of Caste', published by Navayana in 2014. It caused outrage in some Ambedkerites, who argued that Arundhati Roy, being a non-Dalit, has no right to write the introduction of the AoC and that it is nothing but 'appropriation' and 'colonization' of Ambedkar. We may agree, disagree, criticize or even rubbish the Arundhati Roy's introduction to the AoC, but arguing that she has no right to write about Ambedkar is symptomatic of the prevailing sectarianism among a section of Ambedkarites and goes against the very democratic principles for which Dr Ambedkar fought throughout his life.
For the mainstream political parties Dr Ambedkar was just a Dalit leader until very recently, whose only contribution was to help draft the Constitution of India. Every communist party in India rejected him as a petty bourgeois liberal. Possessed by an abstract and unhistorical idea of class struggle not knowing what it means in a society like India that was subjected to the colonial rule for more than two centuries, the communist parties of all hue miserably failed to understand that the fight for the annihilation of caste is very much internal to class struggle in Indian sub-continent .
Dr Ambedkar is now haunting the brhaminical ruling classes in India. The growing importance of Dr Ambedkar in contemporary Indian politics is mainly due to two reasons that of course are interrelated. First: post 1947, the ruling Congress party as well as the Left believed that the institution of caste was the remnants of our feudal past and that it would automatically wither away in post-colonial India under the weight of the forces of ‘modernization’ and ‘development’. The experience of the last seven decades has conclusively proved that it was an erroneously wishful thinking. On the contrary, the institution of caste has successfully Brahminized the ‘modernization’ and ‘development’ processes. Second: the majority of Dalits still lack dignified employment, access to health and education; they face daily violence and discrimination from the caste Hindus. The massive discontent among the Dalits and other oppressed castes has given rise to the powerful movement for social justice. In the last three decades, many Ambedkarite parties have come up in different parts of India making social justice as their main plank.
The ruling classes always try to appropriate the leaders and movements of the oppressed people. The appropriation takes place at different levels—the ruling classes, at times, accept some of the demands of the oppressed people, demands which don’t threatened the existing power structures; by consciously diluting the radical ideas and concept emerging out of movements; by giving privileges and power to those leaders of the oppressed people who clearly show the promise of not questioning the existing power relations etc.
The mainstream political parties in India are desperately trying to appropriate Dr Ambedkar. The RSS’ mouthpiece ‘Organiser’ brought out two special issues on Dr Ambedkar in last one year. The BJP government is organising a series of programme to celebrate the 125th anniversary of Dr Ambedkar.
In this context it is also important to talk about the appropriation of Dr Ambedkar by some so called Ambedkarite organizations and intellectuals, who in order to gain power and privileges in the existing brahminical system, consciously abandon Dr Ambedkar’s vision of the annihilation of caste. We see today a number of big Dalit leaders, from Ramvilas Paswan to Ramdas Athawale, Udit Raj to Jiten Ram Manjhi have joined hands with the RSS/BJP. They are just mute spectator in the face of growing violence against the Dalits.
In the fight for the emancipation of the oppressed people the question of representation is extremely important. However, if the fight for representation becomes an end in itself, it ends up reproducing the existing power structures. Barack Obama is the president of the US for the last eight years. However, the violence and discrimination against the racial minorities in the US have continued unabated.
Coming back to the appropriation of Dr. Ambedkar, let us agree for a moment that the Arundhati Roy’s introduction to the AoC is an act of appropriation of Dr. Ambedkar. But I am unable to make sense of the disproportionate expression of ‘hatred’ towards her for writing the introduction of the AoC. I don’t see such hatred towards the RSS/BJP, which is a pan Indian organization, for its attempt to appropriate Dr Ambedkar. Is Arundhati Roy more powerful than the RSS/BJP?