B.R. Ambedkar, Franz Boas and the Rejection of Racial Theories of Untouchability

Abstract

Tel. +44 (0) 113 343 9730 2 B.R. Ambedkar, Franz Boas and the rejection of racial theories of untouchability Abstract: This paper analyses Ambedkar's challenge to racial theories of untouchability. It examines how Franz Boas' ideas about race, via Alexander Goldenweiser, influenced Ambedkar's political thought. Ambedkar is situated as a thinker aware of larger changes taking place in Western academia in the early twentieth century. During his time at ColumbiaUniversity, Ambedkar familiarised himself with ideas that rejected the fixity of identities and racial hierarchies. Ambedkar, following Boas, rejected the idea that Untouchables's place in society was determined by their supposed racial inferiority. Instead, he argued that untouchability was a cultural problem that could be fought and eradicated.

Analyzing the Evolution of a Rural Construction Community in China from the Perspective of Cultural Landscape

“…Simultaneously, village construction is viewed as a concrete, long-term process constituted by various small-scale events. American anthropologist Franz Boas accentuates the depiction and documentation of specific facts [23], advocating for research on the cultural history, event characteristics, and customs of specific nationalities. Robert Redfield highlights the integration of Great Tradition and Little Tradition within rural construction community [24,25].…”

Field Practice, Emerging Technologies, and Human Rights: the Emergence of Tech Social Workers

“…Race and caste are two distinct visible and invisible social and psychological constructions of identities that are vulnerable to human rights violations (Ambedkar, 1917 ; Cháirez-Garza & Ambedkar, 2018 ). Race is one social identity that is often subject to visible and invisible structural oppression and human rights violations.…”

Spotted Goddesses: Dalit Women’s Agency-narratives on Caste and Gender Violence

“…The author instead clearly shows the complementarity of power and ideology by underscoring the political character of caste as (ideologically) constructing Dalits as stigmatized, 'dirty', and as essentially polluted, and hence permanently pathologized as Other. The chapter also explores, albeit in a not so productive way, the 'racial' basis of caste and the Dravidian/Aryan distinctions-a view that is at odds with the scholarly consensus on rejecting racial theories of caste (Chairez, 2018;Kumar, 2016). The concluding part of the chapter locates Christianity as an alternative for Dalits under colonial and postcolonial conditions, the need to view dignity as a need especially for dehumanized populations, and the ways that the rise of Hindutva makes conversion into the greatest transgression and hence deserving of punishment.…”