This is a summary of Part II of The Annihilation of Caste (one of Babasaheb's great works). 

We can devide this part into four topics :-

  1) The story of the National Congress and the Social Conference.

  2) The condition of the untouchables.

  3) How did the Social Reform Party lose?

  4) References from the past.

1) The story of the National Congress 

and the Social Conference.

    The path of social reform in India is full of difficulties like the road to heaven.  Social reform in India has few friends and many critics.  And these critics fall into two different classes.  First political reformer class and second social reformer class.  For example, the Social conference  with the National Congress was founded on the fact that without social efficiency sustainable progress in other areas is not possible.

   For some time both (ie the Congress and the Conference) functioned as two parts of a common activity.  But soon the two wings evolved into two parties, the first political reform party and the other social reform party, with this the two parties became two opposing factions.  At the same time, the number of people who joined the Congress was also much more than the number of people who attended the social conference. Thus over time the National Congress won and the social conference disappeared and was forgotten.

  w.c.  Bonnerji (who was the President of the 8th session) had said in the 8th session of the Congress in 1842 that

  "I have no patience with those who saw that we would not be fit for political reform unless we reform our social system. I do not see any connection between the two. Can we (of political reform)  Because our widows remain unmarried and our girls get married earlier than in other countries? Because our wives and daughters don't go with us to visit our friends? Because we don't take our daughters to Oxford and Cambridge ?"


 2) The condition of the untouchables.

  Babasaheb later questioned Bonerji's speech that "Those who believe in the importance of social reform may ask whether Mr. Bonerji's argument is final? Does it prove that the Congress won? Is it decisive?  clearly proves, that social reform has no effect on political reform?? if i tell the other side of the case it will help us to understand the matter. I will explain the mistreatment of untouchables."

  Under Peshwa rule in Maratha country, untouchables were not allowed to use public roads as their shadow would pollute upper caste Hindu.  It was necessary for the untouchables to have a black thread on their wrist or around their neck as a sign or mark so that the upper caste Hindus could protect themselves from being polluted by their touch. 

In Poona, the capital of the Peshwa, the untouchables used to wear a broom tied around their waist to clean the place from which they went and a pitcher was hung around their neck so that their spit would not fall on the ground, so that the upper caste Hindus would not be polluted. 

 According to the times of India report of 4 January 1928 that the people of Ballia (an untouchable community of central India) want to live in the village with upper caste Hindus (like Brahmins, Rajputs, Patels, Patwaris etc.), then following the rules  have to follow-

  1) The people of Ballia cannot wear a turban adorned with gold lace.

  (2) They must not wear colored or fancy border dhoti. 

  (3) He shall have to report the death of any hindu to the relatives of the deceased - no matter how far away these relatives may be.

   (4) In all Hindu marriages, the people of Ballia must play music before the procession and during the wedding. 

    (5) Women of Balai society cannot wear gold or silver jewelery or wear fancy gowns or jackets.6) Balai women shall be present in all cases of imprisonment of Hindu women.


  (7) They have to render services without asking for remuneration and accept whatever a Hindu wants to give.


  (8) If they do not agree to comply with these conditions, they will have to move out of the villages.  Ballais refused to comply;  So the Balais will not be allowed to take water from the village wells;  They will not be allowed to go for grazing their cattle.

  There was an incident in which an untouchable from Chakwara, who had returned from a pilgrimage, arranged dinner for his village's untouchable companion as an act of religious kindness.  He served them food with ghee and then hundreds of upper caste Hindus came with sticks and spoiled the food.

  Now from this incident, we can understand that an untouchable was not allowed to use ghee (butter), even though he could afford to buy it.

  Now Babasaheb asks the political minded Hindus that-

  Are you fit for political power, even if you do not allow a large section of your own countrymen like untouchables to use public schools, public wells, public roads, wear jewellery, eat food of choice?  "

  This is not a complete example of why social reforms are important to political reforms, but from the above one can understand why it is important. 

3) Now Question is that How is it then that the Social Reform Party last the battle ?

  Now the question is how did the Social Reform Party lose this battle.  The social conference as we know it was primarily a body of upper caste Hindus.  They considered the reforms in their families to be social reforms.  He never talked about the real problem of the society like he was not interested in removal of caste system, abolition of child marriage and others, because of this he lost the battle.

4) References from the past.

  From history we can understand why social reforms are important for political reforms.  Clearly,

  The religious reform initiated by Luther was a harbinger of the political emancipation of the Europeans.

   Puritanism established political independence in England.  Puritanism founded the New World.  It was puritanism that won the fight for American independence and puritanism was a religious movement.

   The same is the case with the Muslim Empire.  Before the Arabs became a political force, they had gone through a complete religious revolution initiated by the Prophet Muhammad.

  Indian history also supports this conclusion.  The political revolution led by Chandragupta was followed by the religious and social revolution of the Buddha.

   The political revolution under Shivaji was followed by religious and social reforms brought about by the saints of Maharashtra.

  The political revolution of the Sikhs was followed by the religious and social revolution led by Guru Nanak.

   Adding more illustrations is unnecessary.  These will suffice to show that the liberation of mind and spirit is a necessary preparatory to the political expansion of the people.