The poll outcome has indicated that India might be under a longer spell of the Hindutva party as it has strengthened brick by brick. It also reflects what I have been saying about a strong, solid, arrogant Savarna block throughout the country.
 
After the Mandal one, in 1990, we saw, the unity of the Dalits and OBCs all over the country and people were talking about the Uttar Pradesh experiment but now this is completely rescinded. Mandal forces have completely lost their battle. The biggest disappointment is from Bihar where RJD and allied parties are thoroughly routed. This indicates clearly that except for the bhakts, diverse sections of castes compete with each other and many will never go along together. The Bahujan challenge was to bring them together which is not possible without their participation in the power structure.
 
BJP’s electoral plan was engagement with diverse OBC communities in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. In Uttarakhand, they became a nationalist party, attracting ex-servicemen, while in UP, they actually got support from all the segments and the party exists on the ground.
 
I never believed in jumlas and I saw our friends, including many senior ones, giving their ‘decisive’ verdict. A huge number of their bhakts on social media would feel as if they are making the government. Most of them were just calculating on the basis of their caste and numbers while the Sangh worked on the ground. To counter or fight the Sangh or RSS, we need to have a cultural narrative and solid work on the ground, outreach with those communities who have been left out of the broader Dalit Bahujan movement and not insulting them for their faiths or mode of worship.
 
Not that I am shocked with the results but what has convinced me is that most of those writing about the on-ground situation don’t actually know the ground realities. See how the language of the ‘expert’ has changed now in the media, hailing this huge victory of Narendra Modi transcending all the barriers of caste, class, gender, region. My question is when they travelled all over the country and were reporting, why did none of them report that there is this massive ‘Tsunami’ for Narendra Modi.
 
And yes, to strengthen democracy, I would again say, we must ban the Exit Polls and there should be stricter guidelines for media reporting on the issue. Opinion polls must not be allowed before two months of the poll schedule. Election Commission must again focus on rebuilding its credibility and try to rectify the fault lines.
 
Let us not wish ‘death’ for political parties. We are already in an age of a one-party hegemony. What Congress was in the 1960s, the BJP has become today. And definitely they have not come merely on their strength and Savarna reaction alone, all parties including Congress with their lacklustre form of government and party functioning have resulted in this affair.
 
What is important is to build parties in the state, focus for next round of elections, infuse new blood, discard family and caste nepotism, build strong cultural and intellectual groups, engage with those who can give you an honest opinion which you may not like yet will be beneficial for you.
 
Rahul Gandhi’s Chowkidar Chor Hai slogan boomeranged. In a heavily dosed and intoxicated nationalist framework, Rahul Gandhi can’t challenge Narendra Modi. Given Congress party’s own track record on corruption, perhaps Rahul’s raising a corruption issue did not work. A good strategy would have been to leave the issue to be raised by Prashant Bhushan and likes. The second and most important message which BJP and Narendra Modi gave was against ‘political families’. If the results are any indication, I can say, political families will have to think seriously as to how many members of their family will be joining politics and if yes, they need to work. They can’t take people for granted.
 
I think most of us were just calculating caste numbers while Amit Shah was making strategies to take the people to the booths. We can’t take people for granted. People’s vote is not ‘transferable’. Let me say this very categorically, that in the 21st century, people want the unity of forces on a long term basis and social cohesion. If unity does not result in having good candidates in the party, people don’t vote for the same. I can bet SP BSP-RLD votes did not get transferred to each other. it does not happen. It is not easy.
 
The Bahujan narrative will have to rebuild and spread across the country. Baba Saheb, Phule, Periyar, Bharat Singh, Birsa Munda need to be taken to people. Celebrate their work and socialise their ideologies on the ground. There is no respite. Our fight is for an inclusive, equal and humane society based on Constitution, which must go on irrespective of the electoral outcome. But let us realise that answer to these issues and challenges before us do not come from jumlas and we need to have a serious discussion. Not just on social media but we need to meet physically and share our ideas regularly on various platforms.
 
Wish all of you power. The struggle for dignity and human rights will continue.
 

The post Opinion: Bahujans need to spread Phule and Periyar’s message in person, not just on social media appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The election campaigns in North India would have passed uneventfully had Yogi Adityanath not uttered that Lord Hanuman was only a Dalit forest dweller and mere servant of Sri Ram. He said it on impulse at Alwar, Rajasthan during the last phase of elections in November 2018.
 
Dwija Hindus innately knew that most servant characters were only inferior gods, goblins and demons. Be it Hanuman, Bali, Sugriv, Vibhishan, Ahalya, Guha, Jatayu and others who were instrumental in the Ram’s victory or the Kaliyug vanaras who demolished the Babri temple in Ayodhya like L.K. Advaniji and the Hindutva Parivar. These sentiments are not just echoed by the Dwija Hindus but also materialist historians like Kosambi in his ‘Introduction’ who in footnotes depicted the low status of these gods and “the great influence of the Brahmin priesthood towards more humane observances” (p52.)
 
This has remained an uncontested truth for literate Hindus and others for generations. Interestingly, the twenty-first century has opened more venues of communications through social media where learning still remains limited. The Dalit Hanuman barb caught the imagination of New Dalit leadership like Chandrasekhar Azad who went to capture the Hanuman temples in UP and other places. In fact, fresh space for social and cultural struggles has emerged to counter the so-called Hindutva- Capitalist expansion, lest progressive Bhadralok thwarts it with muddled interpretations.
 
Not only the above but several such incidents during the modern period, particularly after 1794 when William Jones had declared that Indians were their long-lost kin, helped both modernists and traditionalists popularise Hinduism of two different camps. The term Hinduism itself was seemingly coined by Jones. On the other hand, Hindutva as an ideology of the Dwija is centred on alien or Mediterranean/BMAC theology. It seems that the present Hindutva forces get their forage from the writings and movements of the British who considered themselves Aryan pedigrees.
 
The writings of Lord Curzon, Waddel L.A and Colonel Olcott of Theosophical society have provided the much-needed intellectual support, not only for the present campaigners but also a section of Indologists who believed that Hinduism originated from Vedic culture. The crafty interpretation of Hindus as a geographical term and way of living is an afterthought cookie to satisfy some dissenters.
 
It is time that one should reflect on this phenomenon that has been cultivated by a social class spread in different camps with the same agenda. The Genetic DNA studies of Harvard Scholar Reich and others summarised in a book by Tony Jones have sufficiently established the fact about Aryan migration. This is now supported by hundreds of web pages on the net about White brotherhood or Aryan migrations justifying what the 19th-century scholars like Muir, Muller etc have said.
 
The soft and hard Hindutva promoted by the pseudo secularists and fake Hindus for the last few decades and the pouring of intermittent verbiage by select few intellectuals did not change the agenda of the debate. The purpose of the moiety of the prize fighters appears to be to bring the warring groups under their control. However, the critiques and applauders of Hindutva have hardly touched the real and crucial issue of the problem. Is the idea of Hinduism or the content, beliefs, gods, rituals, philosophy and other paraphernalia really native to present India borrowed, imposed? What are the similarities and differences between the anthropomorphic gods of the Sumerians and Hindu pantheon based on which cudgels are fought? Why do the Hindutva forces or Brahminical Hinduism hate the native Indians and their belief systems while consciously following the alien gods and being enslaved by them?
 
It is true that any religion is a way of life. It is not necessarily true for Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims or some other faiths. All faiths believe in equality before God, share common values and respect certain traditions and rituals. But they may not help mark the difference between religions. Each religion has certain core values and features, like a holy book, god or gods, rituals etc. It is true even for non-belief systems or faith like ideologies that are thought to be infallible and inalienable by the followers. There are certain practices and relationships that are basic for the survival of a tradition without which its identity is lost. There could be groups or classes who are the adherents of the core values and they protect them with a belief to be in turn protected by them. That gives power, strength, legitimacy and endurance.
 
In this context, we may examine some of the unique characters and practices of Sumerians and Babylonians who had around 3000 gods. We have Zeus, Hades and Poseidon as Brahma, Vishnu and Maheshwara trinity, seven sisters like the sapta rishis, the Lion-headed Meroitic god of Egypt like that of our Narasimha, King Ramasses of Hyksos of 1709 BC like our Lord Rama of Ikshvaku, the Hittite texts, BMAC-Andronovo culture, Zoroastrian culture of the Parsis and the genetic debate etc., have reconfirmed the far-reaching migrations of Aryan tribes. Some of them entered United India Including Pakistan, Afghanistan.  Soviet archaeologists like Viktor Sarianidi, B.G.Gafurov and several others have repudiated the opinion that Aryans already lived in India in 3 millennium BC on the basis of archaeological and linguistic research.
 
Interestingly, thousands of karyakartas spread around the world, mostly in the English-speaking countries (ironically keeping aside the religious restrictions to not, cross oceans) are now working day in and day out to denounce the above findings and use abusive language to criticise scholars and historians who support scientific evidence. Not surprising that all of them, unless hiding their identity, come from the same social class. They are interested in protecting the false identity of Aryan ancestry being Indian. This is Brahminical puritanism, the ideology of Hindutva. The pantheon of gods is different and they alone have properties and wealth.
 
History has given us a new discourse on the Pre-Aryans. Not only the excavations at Indus, Harappa, Kalibangan, Lothal and other places, but even the living cultures are also seen as dichotomous when the non-puritans enter the portals of higher education and start questioning Indian culture. Though an attempt was made by Mahatma Jyotiba Phule to write the history of the native indigenous people and the narrative of alien Bhats occupying India at different points of time as dasavatara, no professional historian has ever paid attention to this literature. The Post-Gramsci-Foucault-Said academic project of subaltern writing of history did not pass the Bhadralok test and remained a mess without much headway to throw light on the real subalterns. The failure of the project itself shows the deep roots of the divide. The so-called Bahujan-Dalit scholarship to challenge the mainstream, mostly the Marxian agenda remained a non-starter. These developments have links with the present narratives of Hindutva and its triumphant suzerainty of India.
 
Most of the critiques in the name of secularism appraise selected ideas like varna, cultural nationalism, myths, Puranic characters, Vedic liturgy, Muslim bashing, actions of sangh parivar etc all bundled in one term Hindutva. This seems to be problematic for an ordinary Hindu or even a non-Hindu Indian. The critiques assume that they are hitting the visible culprit without realising that they have a huge defence mechanism of twisting words, using coarse logic and people friendly manoeuvring and hidden agendas of mainstream political parties. It appears that the leaders or champions of secularism are naïve individuals with enthusiasm and anger to counter the unscientific arguments of the Hindutva brigades. They do not realise that the brigades have a support base, open and veiled from the same platforms from where they encounter the fundamentalists. In some cases, the literal downpour is fortuitous and many times not backed by a concrete plan of action.
 
Even today, the well-intentioned leftist political outfits and secular groups seem to have no clear and structured agenda to counter it. It is alleged that the moles in the political parties are inconspicuously related to the Sangh parivar and therefore communication is much faster and reaction from the adversary very slow (In the Sabarimala controversy Kerala government found them in their Police force). The tentacles are too widespread in the western world. One significant incident of stalling the school syllabus on Hinduism by the Vedic Foundation, Hindu Education Foundation as narrated by Harvard scholar M.Witzel, an internationally reputed scholar on Vedic Literature, Sanskrit and Hinduism in California State, tells of the unprecedented power of the fundamentalists. The challengers of Hindu fundamentalism have not been able to develop a cohesive group, common agenda and content to counter them even after a century. On the other hand, they have not been able to recognise and remember the contributions of great scholars like Rahul Sankrutyayan, M.N. Roy, D.P Chattopadhyay to name a few.
 
Hinduism is equated with Brahminical or Vedic liturgy and pantheon is in fact not a true representation. Hinduism, as projected either by the organised Hindu Parivar or broadly understood by common man, is more than this. The Bahujans (understood as the majority of Hindus) who do respect the Brahminical pantheon, however, had their own ways of worship, ritual and native Indian goddesses, gods and goblins. This unique character has not been distinguished either by experts like Wendy Doniger and other critics of Hindutva.
 
Vedic literature, Upanishads, Puranic and classical literature did not represent the Native Indians or the so-called Bahujans consisting of Adivasis, Dalits and OBCs except by way of expletive expressions. Therefore, when the Secular critics address the Hindus, the lower castes do not react, as they believe they are also Hindus. This is not a post-independent India phenomenon. The colonial powers as collaborators of Brahminical hegemony, as noted above, helped the Hindutva forces to grow while disparaging the local religious practices, rituals and goblins as superstitions through the missionaries like Whitehead and colonial anthropologists.
 
The oriental scholarship and its critiques including Edward Said and his followers have looked at the Native schools of thought rather than Brahminical or alien imports. One need not wonder at this as the Oriental thought relating to Palestine, Israel or Abrahamic faith and the parallel primordial Hindu approaches seem to be the same. If one is inclined to scrutinize the rituals of Brahminical Hindus as historical memory of their ancestral homes being repeated from BMAC or Meru region in Brahminical Hinduism, it would be abundantly clear.
 
The Bahujans of India or the so-called Non-Dwija castes were prohibited to listen, utter or practice Vedic or Brahminical mantras or rituals in the past. Only after the efforts by reformers like Dayanand Saraswati, the Anglicans, Gandhiji and his followers, lower castes were given some ritual status and untouchables allowed inside temples. But, the lower castes or the depressed classes (a nomenclature used before 1935 for several low castes) or Bahujans had had their own systems of thought, gods, goddesses, epistemology, and ceremonies etc as original Indian/Hindu belief bonds. They were marginalised and their culture was interpreted as barbarian and treated as Rakshas or demons, poundras, asuras etc.
 
The Tantric practices in the rudimentary form in the Indus seals and developed as a form of Sankhya being practised even by Tiruvalluvar, Kabir, Veerabrahmendra swamy to name a few low caste players/practitioners were never given any status in Brahminical Hinduism. In fact, the predecessors of Mahavir and Buddha, the Ajivakas or shramanas were considered as inferior to Brahma, Maheshwara and the Almighty Vishnu. In the later period, most of the belief systems, their culture and knowledge goods were appropriated by the mainstream Brahminical systems of worship, rituals and thought. Thus, the prehistoric legacy of Bahujan Hinduism being more ancient, vibrant and inclusive compared to the narrow, Mediterranean Brahminical Hinduism of the recent period was made to demonstrate as original with the support of media and muscle. This has not been recognized by any of the critics of Hinduism.
 
There seems to be some confusion when the low castes or Bahujans were made to identify as followers of Brahminical Hinduism in modern times. In fact, the British India Courts, particularly in the South, was full of litigations, each lower caste claiming a ritual status like the carpenter /smiths claiming ViswaBrahmin, Barbers claiming NaiBrahmin and so on. They had provided intelligent arguments and spiritual episteme of their own, challenging the Brahminical supremacy.
 
Actually, it was a big crusade called Bhakti movement (pre-British) initiated mostly by the low castes or Non-Brahmins. They were supported by all progressive intellectuals including Gandhi, Ambedkar and social reformers in different parts of the country. Had it been continued without interruptions and appropriations, it would have turned the nation into a secular polity. But, the vibrant Hindutva today gained control over Bahujans without giving status to their belief systems through co-option, patronage and funding. The left, secular and democratic activists are bereft of the dichotomy between Bahujan Hindus and Brahminical Hindutva by clubbing them together. This has alienated them from the ignorant victims and seems to have lost the plot.
 
The non-Hindu forces have failed to project and popularise the native, original and materialistic traditions of the Non-Brahmin as superior if not equal and distinct in status. Further, the secularists lost steam under the tutelage of base-superstructure imagery claiming that these small issues will disappear once economic independence is gained. Is it true?
 
The author is Former Vice-Chancellor, Dravidian University, A.P. Guest of honour Speech delivered at 11th FIRA conference at Visakhapatnam, 5 January 2019.

First published on Counter Currents
 

The post How Brahminical Hindutva co-opted Bahujan history to emerge on top appeared first on SabrangIndia.

We remember Ram Manohar Lohia on his 50th death anniversary. Lohia (October 12, 2017).
 
He was a political giant who took on Nehru when the rest of the nation was in awe with him. However, to defeat Nehru, Lohia did not have any issues joining hands with the Sangh Parivar. In fact, this remains the biggest tragedy of independent India: this anti Congressism actually helped legitimise rabid communal elements. A similar thing happened when JP launched his ‘Sampoorn Kranti’ which became a ‘sawarna kranti’!
 
Lohia knew India’s caste arithmetic but politics is not merely about caste and communal calculations. Beyond that, Lohia’s obsession with anti-Congressism actually damaged the socialist movement. He never realised that the Sangh Parivar and its various offshoots are equally dangerous to the the integrity of the country. While it was important to fill the opposition space and fight against the authoritarianism of the Congress party, yet in doing so, any legitimacy to communal fascist forces was detrimental. The result: everywhere the Hindutva protagonists rode on the piggyback of the Samajwadis and decimated them. Jayaprakash gave these forces further legitimacy during the anti emergency movement. The Janata government came to power in 1975 and broke on the question of double membership of the some of the members of Jan Sangh with the RSS in 1979.
 
While both Lohia and JP were great socialists, they however never challenged brahmanical hegemony. The result is that OBCs under Lohiaism in Uttar Pradesh, though, organised, could not create an alternative of brahmanical hegemony. Challenging Congress politically and creating an alternative to brahmanism are two different things. You cannot challenge brahmanism by being part of it.
 
Whatever Lohia was politically, socio-culturally, he unfortunately never challanged brahmanical hegemony. I am not sure what made him suggest that Rama and Krishna was the ‘icons’ of India despite having a rational mind. Dr Ambedkar and many others have refused to accept this and we know this well through Ambedkar’s Riddles of Hinduism.
 
But one thing is clear. Lohia was a definitely politician with superior intellect. At a time when it was difficult to take Nehru on, Lohia did so in equally strong terms and with great oratory. My lasting regret is why Lohia could not or did not meet Dr Ambedkar. Though we have information now which suggests that Lohia wanted Ambedkar to be the leader of RPI and had shown willingness to join the movement led by Dr Ambedkar, this did not happen. It was unfortunate that Dr Ambedkar passed away in December 1956 and the party he envisioned actually could not do anything specific related to this. It is also a fact that RPI had a strong presence in Uttar Pradesh and Punjab for many years.
 
Right now, the challenge is huge and the movement of the OBCs has moved ahead. Lohia’s failing was that he could not create a visionary leadership which could take over the movement. In the name of Bahujans, OBC leaders in Uttar Pradesh have reduced themselves to chanting Lohia-isms while remaining foot soldiers of the Brahmanical social order. It is time they now join the broader Dalit Bahujan movement led by Jyoti Ba Phule, Baba Saheb Ambedkar and EVR Periyar who gave people of India a new identity and strength to fight against all kinds of social evils, providing them with alternative paths.
 
Varnashram dharma is using all the tricks in the book to keep the foot soldiers within its fold. Lohia did not have the strength to fight against this as he did not provide any alternative to it which could be challenge the caste hegemony of the Dwijas. He did not provide any alternative cultural vision which Phule, Ambedkar and Periyar provided to people.
 
We do not support Lohia’s Hindi fanaticism or anti Englishism as it will not take India anywhere particularly its vast Dalit Bahujan masses who have been denied right to education and knowledge by the Varna-ashram dharma. We need a counter culture of India’s Bahujan masses, that is humanistic in nature where the philosophy revolve around human being and not laying down our lives for a fictitious God or gods.
 
Of course, we must not deny his great contribution to politicise the concerns of the OBCs; however the battle is not merely political but cultural too. Lohiaism is status quoist and ends up at the feet of Gandhism which the vast numbers of Dalit Bahujan masses have already rejected as it does not inspire them.
 
Ram Manohar Lohia must be remembered for his great role in popularising socialism and creating an alternative to Nehru’s policies,  but how can this be justified by allying with the Sangh Parivar ?
 
 

The post Taking Stock of Ram Manohar Lohia, on His 50 Death Anniversary, a Bahujan Perspective appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The seminar, conducted at the KN Uduppa Auditorium of the University focused on the directions and conditions of the Bahujan society and was organised by the SC-ST Students Committee of the University.

Sonkar said, “The BJP is scared of the Bahujan movement.” He alleged that BJP is not letting the ideas and literature of the Bahujan heroes reach the public, and instead the party is using its power to spread wrong information about the Bahujan leaders in the university and the institutes of the country.

“In such a scenario, it is necessary that students should read the actual writing of Bahujan ideologues and leaders. Their ideas will help in defeating the communal and feudalist forces,” said Sonkar, while appealing the listeners to read non-conventional and alternative publications more and more.

Ex-member of the legislative council of UP and special guest at the event Shivbodh Ram talked about the role of OBCs and said, “Some of them oppose us because they do not know many things about us, but the really strange people are the ones who oppose us even after they know everything about us.”

Prof MP Ahirwar, a faculty at BHU and the main speak at the seminar talked about how Kanshi Ram took forward the Bahujan movement started out by Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar. He said, “Kanshi Ram took forward the Bahujan movement and ideas led by Jyotiba Phule, Chhatrapati Shahu, and Ambedkar. Kanshi Ram consolidated the Bahujans who were scattered in many parts and changed the course of the Indian politics.

“It is Kanshi Ram’s effect that none can talk about winning elections without the votes of Dalits and Bahujans,” he added.

In his presidential note, Prof Lal Chand talked about the representation of Dalits and Bahujans in institutions.

Pramod Kumar Bangade, Amar Nath Paswan, DK Ojha, Sandeep Gautam, Kumari Anita, Ravindra Prakash Bhartiya, Ajay Kumar, Naresh Ram, and several others put forward their views during the seminar. Pratima Gond, Dhiraj Verma, GP Choudhary, Pratibha Gautam, Varun Kumar Bhaskar, Bacche Lal, Manish Kumar Bhartiya, Dhananjay Bharti, Dheeraj Bharti and several others were present too from the faculty.

Courtesy: Two Circles

The post Seminar in BHU criticises BJP and RSS for destroying the image of Bahujan heroes appeared first on SabrangIndia.

कन्हैया कुमार कहाँ है? नजीब का मसला हो या इफ्लू का या इंटरव्यू के वेटेज का या फ़ैकल्टी में रिज़र्वेशन का या रोहित वेमुला केस के एक साल होने पर राधिका अम्मा की गिरफ़्तारी का?

वह नहीं है। वह कहीं नहीं है। वह कभी आपके साथ था ही नहीं।

कन्हैया कुमार एक भ्रम है। एक मायाजाल। वह उस आंदोलन में भी नहीं था, जिसके लिए उस पर आरोप लगे थे। अफ़ज़ल वाले मामले में भी उस पर झूठे आरोप लगे थे। वह वहाँ भी नहीं था।
 
लेकिन उस आंदोलन से वह अपने काम की चीज़ ले गया। पेंग्विन से उसकी किताब आ गई। वह इन दिनों कॉरपोरेट स्पांसर्ड लिट्रेचर फ़ेस्टिवल का देश भर में स्थायी मेहमान है। दिल्ली और कसौली में बोल चुका है। कोच्चि में बोलेगा। उसका सुंदर भविष्य उसका इंतज़ार कर रहा है।
 
आपके आसपास दर्जनों कन्हैया कुमार हैं। कुछ बनने की कोशिश कर रहे हैं।

आप उन्हें बनने से नहीं रोक सकते।

उनके पीछे जाति की ताक़त है। कल्चरल और सोशल कैपिटल है।

मीडिया उसका। चैनल के पैनल पर वह बैठेगा। उसकी ख़बर हेडलाइन बनेगी।

ये राहुल सोनपिंपले, दिलीप यादव, मुलायम, चिन्मय, भूपाली, डोंथा प्रशांत, श्रेयत बौद्ध, संजय बौद्ध, काव्यश्री, इसाबेल…,ये सब कौन होते हैं।

इन्हें इग्नोर करके मार दिया जाएगा।

उनका कभी कुछ नहीं बिगड़ता। बिगड़ता आपका है।

इसलिए कृपया हुलेले करते हुए उनके पीछे पीछे मत चलिए। और चल दिए तो बाद में रोइए मत कि आंदोलनों में कन्हैया लापता क्यों है।

वह आंदोलनों में कभी था ही नहीं। उसका होना एक भ्रम था।
 
एक अन्य पोस्ट में दिलीप मंडल लिखते हैं…..

यह आदमी ज़िंदा चाहिए।

भारत के तमाम बहुजन लेखकों को जोड़कर अखिल भारतीय बहुजन साहित्य सम्मेलन करने और उससे पहले अखिल भारतीय ओबीसी साहित्य सम्मेलन करने की महत्वाकांक्षी योजना के दिलीप यादव सूत्रधार है।

इस तरह के काम करने लिए बहुजन टैलेंट अभी सीमित संख्या में है।

इन्हें सिर्फ इसलिए मरने नहीं दिया जा सकता कि RSS पोषित वाइस चांसलर और सेकुलर ब्राह्मणवादी प्रोफ़ेसर्स ऐसा चाहते हैं।

इसलिए भी नहीं कि SC, ST, OBC को इनके आंदोलन के महत्व का अंदाज़ा नहीं है।

दिलीप यादव का अनशन ख़त्म होना ज़रूरी है।

Courtesy: National Dastak
 

The post बहुजन आंदोलन में कन्हैया कुमार कहां है- दिलीप मंडल appeared first on SabrangIndia.