"When the Simon Commission came to India in 1928, it was boycotted by the Congress but the oppressed classes took it as an opportunity to present their case." I find it interesting that Dr Radhakrishnan uses the term "oppressed classes" here. By using such a term one 's attention is diverted from the true nature of India's so-called "oppressed classes" - that they are the victims of a caste-bases system. In India what is required in terms of a revolution is a "caste war" that will turn the tables on a Brahmin-dominated society. Such a war is inevitable. Ambedkar understoof the logic of such a war - it can be waged on many fronts - the economic, the religious (through conversions0, the military (what would then be dubbed as "terrorism", the social (through some form of education), etc. But what happens usually is that the upper caste intellecutals be they Marxist or otherwise who generally speak "on behalf" of the "oppressed classes" still try to make us believe that these are "classes" that are oppressed and not "castes", particularly lower castes. This is a means of pulling the semantic wool over everyone's eyes. It is good to be able to see through this strategic approach. Avy
