From Bolivar to Ambedkar: Revolutionaries shaping the Global South

In this blog, let’s explore ideas of the global south and nationalism. What is the Global South? Who was Bolivar? What did Ambedkar do? How did they contribute to our lives? These are a few questions we shall explore in this blog. 

Definition

The term Global South is not a geographical one, it refers to a wider context of globalization and economic development. It comprises Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, Asia (excluding Israel, Japan, South Korea) and Oceania (excluding Australia and New Zealand). This term is used mainly for developing countries. The characteristics of global south countries include lacking standard of living, high level of poverty, lacking income, high population rates, deficient health care, poor education system, and more. 

Often, cities of the Global South are identified by their infrastructure and population dependent on agriculture as a source of income. 

Origin

The term ‘Global South’ originated back in 1969. It was first used by political activist Carl Oglesby in the catholic journal Commonweal in a special issue on the Vietnam war. Oglesby argued that prolonged centuries of northern dominance over the global south has created an intolerable social order. The term gained popularity in the second half of the 20th century. It started being used widely in publications in the year of 2004 and 2013. It's a less hierarchical term compared to those such as Third World or Developing countries. 

The idea of categorising countries on the basis of their development started back in the days of the Cold War with classification of East and West. In fact, the term Global South originates from the classification of First world, second world, and third world. Following the end of the cold war and disintegration of the Soviet Union, certain second world countries joined the First World, while others joined the Third world. This new setup complicated the situation, it was easier to use the terms of north and south. 

The Common Thread

Latin America and India are two places united under the concept of Global South. They share very similar social, economic situations and developmental challenges. Historically speaking, these countries do share similar experiences, we will explore that further in the blog.

Nationalism and development are two very connected topics. In Latin America specifically, Simon Bolivar was a revolutionary who led to the formation of nation states in many Latin American countries. But, who was Bolivar? 

An Introduction to Bolivar

Simon Bolivar was born in Caracas, in the Captaincy General of Venezuela in a wealthy american-born spaniard (criollo) family. From 1803 to 1805, he went on a journey that ended in Rome, he later decided to swear to end the Spanish rule in the Americas. 1n 1807, he came back to Venezuela and invoked feelings of nationalism and independence in the minds of creoles. Bolivar was a key player in the independence of Venezuela from Spanish forces. In the year 1813, he led forces that successfully annexed Caracas and declared Venezuela as an independent nation. His campaign of takeover in 1813 was called the “Admirable Campaign”. Bolivar is often referred to as “El Liberador”, or the liberator. This is because he liberated not only Venezuela but also Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia and Panama. 

In 1819, Bolivar liberated Colombia through successful military campaigns in the Battle of Boyacá. It led to the formation of Gran Colombia and established a provisional government. 

In 1822, Bolivar liberated Ecuador via military campaign and The Battle of Pichincha, which took place on the slopes of Pichincha volcano near Quito. Post his victory, Ecuador was liberated and incorporated under the Gran Colombia. This integration was short lived, Bolivar was the head of this federation. Gran Colombia included territories of present day Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Panama, northern Peru, northwest Brazil and western Guyana. Ecuador separated from this arrangement due to regional tensions, disagreements and Bolivar’s resignation as president. 

In the case of Peru, Bolivar brought freedom to the country in 1824 by joining forces with Jose de San Martin, who was a great national hero of Argentina, Chile and Peru. He played a key role in the military campaign in the Battle of Junín and the Battle of Ayacucho. After successfully defeating Spain, Bolivar became the dictator of Peru and created a sovereign nation. 

The name Bolivia is fascinating. Infact, the country was renamed after its liberator Bolivar himself. It was a part of his independence movement in Peru, Bolivar with the help of Antonio Jose de Sucre, defeated Spanish troops in Upper Peru which later became Bolivia. 

Panama has a different method of liberation, Bolivar did not use physical force or traditional methods of liberation. Bolivar advocated the notion of Independence in his writings and the formation of Gran Colombia also increased the stress of liberation for Panama. In one of his works called ‘Letter from Jamaica’, Bolivar highlights Panama’s potential as a nation. All different actions together paved the way for the nation state creation of Panama.  

An Introduction to Dr. B.R Ambedkar

The stories of Bolivar have always fascinated me, another revolutionary who I feel significantly impacted the world is none other than Dr. B.R Ambedkar. He was born in the town of Mhow, which is now called Dr. Ambedkar Nagar. Being born in a Dalit family, he faced significant discrimination. Dalits were segregated in society and treated harshly. In the times of Indian nationalism, Dr. Ambedkar played a major role. He demanded separate electorates and reservation for Dalit and lower caste communities.  In the times of Indian nationalism, Dr. Ambedkar played a significant role. He demanded separate electorates and reservation for Dalit and lower caste communities. As an advocate, he promoted education for Dalits and started an establishment called Bahishkrit Hitakarini Sabha to improve the educational and economic situation for the outcastes. He wrote in many periodicals and discussed pressing issues for representation of the depressed classes. 

Ambedkar wrote an entire list of suggestions for the future Indian constitution during his time working in the Simon Commission of 1925. 

By 1927, Ambedkar launched movements and protests against discrimination of the depressed classes. He demanded for the right of lower castes to enter Hindu temples, free access to wells, and other steps to improve their situation. In fact, he even burned the ancient hindu text called Manusmriti for justifying division and discrimination of castes. Due to this action, every 25th December is celebrated as Manusmriti Dihan Day. 

In 1932, Ambedkar had to give up his hope for a separate electorate since Gandhi ji felt that separate electorate would significantly increase the situation of division in Indian society and Gandhi Ji started fasting to his death while imprisoned. He performed such an action to stop demands for a separate electorate. Ambedkar had no choice but to give up his demand. However, the term ‘Depressed Class’, was renamed as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under the India Act 1935 and Indian Constitution in 1950. 

Dr. Ambedkar was also the Chairman of the Drafting Committee of the Constitution of India, he argued for extensive rights for women in all fields. He introduced the concept of reservation which is still widely used in today's time. He was the leader in creation of many aspects of the constitution. As a student passionate about law, reading the constitution I understood that Ambedkar led to the creation of the constitution as a ‘living body’, most parts of the constitution can be changed and amended as per the need of the time. 

Two Sides of a Revolution

From the discussion on Bolivar and Ambedkar we can understand that they did represent two sides of a revolution. They were both focused on liberation. While Bolivar mainly focused on liberation of foreign countries from Spanish rule, Ambedkar focused on social and economic liberation from internal oppression. Bolivar established independence and Ambedkar maintained independence in India through the detailed constitution. They both used support from their own communities. While both of them seem different, they both represent two sides of the same coin. In fact, they share a common thread - their pursuit for a just and equitable society. They understood the need for change and led to significant formation of their nations. Bolivar used revolutions that were mainly military, Ambedkar on the other hand used his ideas of social reform. 

Their contribution

I can’t even start to imagine how different India would be without Dr. Ambedkar’s contribution. He truly shaped the country, similarly, I believe Bolivar too played an extensive role in Latin America. Life for the people changed significantly post revolution in many ways. In the case of Latin America, the changes were in three main dimensions: 

• Political - Overthrow of colonial rule and establishment of republics with values. It evoked a sense of freedom in the people and national identity.

• Social - Social equality was brought and slavery was abolished. People had some amount of religious freedom, yet, due to the revolution many people were displaced and it caused social upheavals and loss of lives.

• Economic - A new economic system came into being, as in any new system it brought economic instability and problems for the citizens. 

Dr. Ambedkar's role on the other hand was slightly different. He led to changes in the country in four main dimensions: 

• Social - Untouchability was abolished thanks to Dr. Ambedkar’s work. He highlighted the importance of social integration of lower castes and brought empowerment to marginalized societies. 

• Economic - He stressed for land reforms and economic policies to directly assist marginalised communities. 

• Constitutional - He brought reservation policies in the constitution and shaped many laws and rules with the constitution. 

• Involvement of Public - Under Ambedkar’s leadership Dalits and other lower castes organised and mobilized their rights. They got a stronger voice and could fulfill their basic wishes and demands. 

Conclusion

It is important to understand however that both Ambedkar and Bolivar were not perfect leaders. While they led to nationalism and liberation of societies in their respective countries they also faced criticism. Ambedkar was often criticized as only being focused on Dalits and the oppressed class. Bolivar was often viewed as an authoritative leader who used brutal force. Everyone has their own view to understand the past. In my opinion, I feel we must respect their actions. The time and situation was very different to today and they made a significant impact which cannot be ignored.