Why do people still talk about Ambedkar like he’s more than just a historical figure?
Why do people still talk about Ambedkar like he’s more than just a historical figure?
Share
Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Ambedkar was not only a freedom fighter or some ancient politician with a long name in textbooks. He was a straight-up revolution wrapped in human form. Born into a system that literally informed him he didn’t belong, he turned the tables with sheer intellect—like, not only “worked hard” but “flexed so hard he received several doctorates” type.
But it wasn’t degrees alone. He didn’t drive up to Oxford and Columbia just to groove. He learned about how societies function so he could dismantle what was broken in India—such as caste, inequality, and artificial social order. And then this guy returns, writes the Indian Constitution (essentially the user guide of the nation), and incorporates elements such as Article 32 so people could finally question injustice. That’s crazy.
And the best part is, he didn’t leave politics alone. He learned about power in every way—religion, law, money, knowledge. So when he became a Buddhist, it wasn’t a spiritual choice—it was a mic drop moment of declaring, “I don’t need your permission to be free.”