Separate electorates aimed to guarantee Untouchables independent political leverage against numeric and physical domination

Evidence

In these double-member constituencies (DMCs), one member was to be selected from among Untouchables (or Adivasis/Scheduled Tribes as the case may be), and one from among the Hindus. This meant, first, that Untouchables, and only Untouchables, would choose their representatives to legislatures. Second, they would be able to cast a second ballot to have a say in who among the caste Hindus was best suited—or least inimical—to represent Untouchable interests in a legislative body. Such safeguards were necessary, argued Ambedkar, since not only were Untouchables outnumbered by savarnas (caste Hindus), sometimes to the tune of “one to ten”, they were also physically vulnerable to attacks by caste Hindus during elections—the kind of violence that continues to take place in most parts of India even today. Since the Untouchables did not enjoy civil, economic or religious rights on a par with the caste Hindus, and they were widely and routinely stigmatised, Ambedkar believed that a mere right to vote would do them no good, and that they would be subject to the manipulations and machinations of Hindus. The double vote, with the right to exclusively elect their own representatives, would ensure that the savarnas and the rest of society came to regard Untouchables as worthy of respect and dignity. Indeed, Untouchables would become politically consequential citizens—Dalits. — Ambedkar, B R, Annihilation of Caste_ The Annotated…, 1303

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains exactly how double-member constituencies (DMCs) under the Communal Award were designed to work — a precise mechanism worth preserving.
• QUESTION: Ambedkar’s expectation that the double vote would force savarnas to respect Untouchables as politically consequential — did any empirical evidence ever bear this out before the award was reversed four days later?
• XREF: connects to: Control over suffrage was the key lever of political power — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 651; Equalizing resources lets dominated parties defend themselves and end domination — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 341; Politicians deliberately shape who votes by steering policy to select their own electorate. — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 281