LSE - Small Logo
LSE - Small Logo

Aakash Singh Rathore

January 13th, 2025

Fraternity or Political Love: Looking at the Preamble of the Constitution of India

0 comments | 4 shares

Estimated reading time: 10 minutes

Aakash Singh Rathore

January 13th, 2025

Fraternity or Political Love: Looking at the Preamble of the Constitution of India

0 comments | 4 shares

Estimated reading time: 10 minutes

This post is the first in the LSE South Asia Centre’s year-long activities marking the 75th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of India in 1950. In this post, Aakash Singh Rathore discusses the idea of ‘maitri‘ (fraternity), introduced by Dr B. R. Ambedkar in the Preamble, and the fundamental nuance it brings to the codification of India as a Republic.

       

India is becoming polarised. Over the last couple of decades, ideological options have been narrowing considerably so that there are predominantly only two socially acceptable points of view on national issues, including constitutional issues, one radically opposed to the other. We have long seen this reduction of nuance and increase in polarity via television news debates. Commentators representing one side spew venom at those from the rival position, humiliate and disparage them, seeking only to win the debate at all costs. Even more dangerous is how news and information is consumed through social media and the internet.   

With Twitter/X, Facebook and similar platforms, we increasingly live in echo chambers within which we hear our own ideology repeated. We listen less and less to points of view that challenge our own.  Algorithms keep us in these bubbles, displaying only what we agree with or what agrees with us. This constant repetition of the attitudes of our in-groups alienates us from those who think differently. It dehumanises our others, making us less concerned for their welfare, indifferent to their tragedies and annoyed  at their triumphs. 

At the same time, as we encounter only curated caricatures of rival positions, we continue to lose grasp of the art of compassionate debate, and  seriously run the risk of losing the capacity to effectively communicate with our ideological rivals. With communication gone, the option that stands out is violent confrontation.

Thus, it is instructive to look back to an earlier period of Indian history where violence — again polarised, but at that time along religious lines — was rampant. It was the era of Constitution-making, some  75 years ago. Our focus will be on the Preamble of India’s Constitution, and the instructive attitude of its primary author.

The Origin and Role of Fraternity in the Preamble

An interesting thing about the drafting of the Indian Constitution was the way that the Drafting Committee responded to widespread communal violence and social unrest by adding new ideas to the Preamble. In fact, by introducing the term ‘fraternity’, the Committee wilfully exceeded the mandate granted them by the Constituent Assembly.

The mandate had been to repurpose the unanimously-adopted ‘Objectives Resolution’, moved by Jawaharlal Nehru (later Prime Minister) in 1946, to function as the Constitution’s Preamble. Instead, B.R. Ambedkar (Chair of the Drafting Committee) decided to completely rewrite it, focused upon social affectivity as the foundation for political viability. As he saw it, political democracy relied upon social cohesion, ‘fraternity’, for its success.

The draft Preamble to the Indian Constitution, which Ambedkar introduced in early February 1948, included a ‘fraternity’ clause without precedent. If you check any history of the Constitution of India, any commentary on the Preamble, they all vaguely gloss over the appearance of this term, and elision  that gives the impression that the term seems to have simply fallen from the sky.

It is worth noting that Constituent Assembly Member Thakur Das Bhargava expressed his ‘gratitude to Dr. Ambedkar’, as opposed to the Drafting Committee as a whole, ‘for having added the word “fraternity” to the Preamble’, for it was indeed Ambedkar himself who personally added the word. Bhargava said:

I think, Sir, that the soul of this Constitution is contained in the Preamble and I am glad to express my sense of gratitude to Dr. Ambedkar for having added the word ‘fraternity’ to the Preamble. Now, Sir, I want to apply the touch-stone of this Preamble to the entire Constitution. If Justice,Liberty, Equality and Fraternity are to be found in this Constitution, if we can get this ideal through this Constitution, I maintain that the Constitution is good. In so far as these four things which are contained in the Preamble are wanting, then I am bound to say that the Constitution is wanting, and from this angle I want to judge the Constitution.

In 1948, Ambedkar had sent the completed draft Constitution to Rajendra Prasad (President of the Constituent Assembly; later President of India) along with a cover note containing a confession about its departure from the Objectives Resolution:

The committee has added a clause about fraternity in the Preamble although it does not occur in the Objectives Resolution. The committee felt that the need for fraternal concord and goodwill in India was never greater than now and that this particular aim of the new Constitution should be emphasised by special mention in the Preamble.

Partition in particular, but long-enduring casteism too, had alerted Ambedkar to the fact that Indian democracy could either be erected upon a foundation of violence and fear, or upon a foundation of brotherhood and love. By introducing the novel term ‘fraternity’ into the Constitution, Ambedkar was opting for the latter.

Fraternity was a concept of significance to Ambedkar for more than a decade prior to his work on the Drafting Committee. He had already spoken of it in a speech (published as The Annihilation of Caste (1936), stating:

Fraternity … is only another name for democracy. Democracy is not merely a form of Government. It is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint communicated experience. It is essentially an attitude of respect and reverence towards fellow men.

Ambedkar also spoke about fraternity in his famous speech on 25 November 1949 to the Constituent Assembly. Commentators on this speech always remind us of Ambedkar’s ominous forecast for ‘a life of contradictions’,but very rarely do they highlight that his solution was love:

Political democracy cannot last unless there lies at the base of it social democracy … a way of life which recognises … fraternity as the principle of life … Without fraternity, liberty and equality could not become a natural course of things.

Even years after the drafting of the Constitution, Ambedkar did not stop speaking of fraternity. But by this late date he reconceived it in the light of Buddhist thought and practice:

The Buddha … gave the highest place to fraternity as the only real safeguard against the denial of liberty or equality — fraternity, which was another name for brotherhood or humanity … The proper term is what the Buddha called Maitri.

Maitri, loving kindness. This was what Ambedkar ultimately rewrote the Preamble to include. He made his reasoning clear, and his claim is as relevant today as it was back then: the Indian Republic would only thrive through affective political bonds, by love and not by fear.

The Constituent Assembly Debates: Fraternity in Action

India’s Constituent Assembly spent nearly two years engaged in multiple re-draftings of our Constitution. This laborious process, across three separate readings, was finally coming to a conclusion toward the end of 1949. On 25 November, Ambedkar, who had steered the project from its inception, made a motion in the Assembly that the Constitution should now be adopted. In the process, Ambedkar delivered his final address, certainly one of the finest speeches of his stellar career.

As mentioned, the speech has been commented upon innumerable times. Some of its catchiest phrases (‘the grammar of anarchy’, ‘a life of contradictions’) have even been appropriated as book titles. But there is one peculiar event from this address that gets universally passed over without mention. And it is strikingly relevant for today.

Ambedkar began his final address in the customary way, by thanking members of the Drafting Committee, its support staff and advisors. He thanked the ruling party members and their effective whip, as well as others who facilitated the completion of the Herculean task of finalising the new Constitution for the future Republic.

But then the speech took an unexpected turn.

Ambedkar mentioned individually several members of the assembly who had done the opposite of all of those whom he had just thanked. That is, he called out and thanked the ‘rebels’, salient voices of opposition who had routinely challenged Ambedkar’s drafting, not once, not occasionally, but frequently and consistently throughout the years-long process. Again, to be clear, Ambedkar thanked individually and by name each one of his most vociferous political opponents.

As he put it:

The points they raised were mostly ideological. That I was not prepared to accept their suggestions does not diminish the value of their suggestions … I am grateful to them. But for them, I would not have had the opportunity which I got for expounding the principles underlying the Constitution, which was more important than the mere mechanical work of passing the Constitution.

This was fraternity —the new concept that he had recently introduced into the Constitution’s Preamble— in action.

Ambedkar said that he was grateful to his ideological opponents because their constant challenges had forced him to reflect upon and expound his own position in a much more thoroughgoing way than if he had been surrounded by ‘yes men’ or only heard his own side repeated in an echo chamber. Principles, he pointed out, were ultimately more important than convenience. This was especially true when constitutional essentials (basic structures, separation of powers, fundamental rights) were on the line. Disturbing or delaying the process in order to ensure the clarity and soundness of the underlying principles was something that policy-makers, leaders, persons in power, ought to welcome. 

*

In plain terms, what Ambedkar was highlighting here was that dissent improves us — we need to hear the other side of things. It enriches constitutional democracy.

That Ambedkar enjoyed the wisdom to recognise this provides the backdrop for the central role that ‘fraternity’ played in the later parts of this historic speech. He argued that cultivating fraternity — an attitude of mutual respect, even for our ideological opponents — was what would one day allow our fractured state to become unified as a nation. 

Today, however, we find ourselves not unified, but bifurcated, polarised. This is one among innumerable other reasons that it is always fruitful to look back at Ambedkar and the era of Constitution-making.

*

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent the views of the ‘South Asia @ LSE’ blog, the LSE South Asia Centre or the London School of Economics and Political Science. Please click here for our Comments Policy.

This blogpost may not be reposted by anyone without prior written consent of LSE South Asia Centre; please e-mail southasia@lse.ac.uk for permission.

Banner image © The ‘Constitution of India,1950–2025’ logo is copyrighted by the LSE South Asia Centre, and may not be used by anyone for any purpose. The lettering and design are adapted from the Preamble of the Constitution of India, 1950; it is designed by Oroon Das.

*



Print Friendly, PDF & Email

About the author

Aakash Singh Rathore

Dr Aakash Singh Rathore is the author of 'Ambedkar’s Preamble: A Secret History of the Constitution of India' (2020), and 'Becoming Babasaheb: The Life and Times of Dr B. R. Ambedkar' (2023).

Posted In: Constitution of India @ 75

Jaipur Palace

CONTRIBUTE

South Asia @ LSE welcomes contributions from LSE faculty, fellows, students, alumni and visitors to the school. Please write to southasia@lse.ac.uk with ideas for posts on south Asia-related topics.

Bad Behavior has blocked 6144 access attempts in the last 7 days.