Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar Cause Of Death

Political career

In 1935, Ambedkar was appointed principal of the Government Law College, Bombay, a position he held for two years. He also served as the chairman of Governing body of Ramjas College, University of Delhi, after the death of its Founder Shri Rai Kedarnath. Settling in Bombay (today called Mumbai), Ambedkar oversaw the construction of a house, and stocked his personal library with more than 50,000 books. His wife Ramabai died after a long illness the same year. It had been her long-standing wish to go on a pilgrimage to Pandharpur, but Ambedkar had refused to let her go, telling her that he would create a new Pandharpur for her instead of Hinduism's Pandharpur which treated them as untouchables. At the Yeola Conversion Conference on 13 October in Nasik, Ambedkar announced his intention to convert to a different religion and exhorted his followers to leave Hinduism. He would repeat his message at many public meetings across India.

In 1936, Ambedkar founded the Independent Labour Party, which contested the 1937 Bombay election to the Central Legislative Assembly for the 13 reserved and 4 general seats, and secured 11 and 3 seats respectively.

Ambedkar published his book Annihilation of Caste on 15 May 1936. It strongly criticised Hindu orthodox religious leaders and the caste system in general, and included "a rebuke of Gandhi" on the subject. Later, in a 1955 BBC interview, he accused Gandhi of writing in opposition of the caste system in English language papers while writing in support of it in Gujarati language papers.

Ambedkar served on the Defence Advisory Committee and the Viceroy's Executive Council as minister for labour.

In his work Who Were the Shudras?, Ambedkar tried to explain the formation of untouchables. He saw Shudras and Ati Shudras who form the lowest caste in the ritual hierarchy of the caste system, as separate from Untouchables. Ambedkar oversaw the transformation of his political party into the Scheduled Castes Federation, although it performed poorly in the 1946 elections for Constituent Assembly of India. Later he was elected into the constituent assembly of Bengal where Muslim League was in power.

Ambedkar contested in the Bombay North first Indian General Election of 1952, but lost to his former assistant and Congress Party candidate Narayan Kajrolkar. Ambedkar became a member of Rajya Sabha, probably an appointed member. He tried to enter Lok Sabha again in the by-election of 1954 from Bhandara, but he placed third (the Congress Party won). By the time of the second general election in 1957, Ambedkar had died.

Ambedkar also criticised Islamic practice in South Asia. While justifying the Partition of India, he condemned child marriage and the mistreatment of women in Muslim society.

No words can adequately express the great and many evils of polygamy and concubinage, and especially as a source of misery to a Muslim woman. Take the caste system. Everybody infers that Islam must be free from slavery and caste. [While slavery existed], much of its support was derived from Islam and Islamic countries. While the prescriptions by the Prophet regarding the just and humane treatment of slaves contained in the Koran are praiseworthy, there is nothing whatever in Islam that lends support to the abolition of this curse. But if slavery has gone, caste among Musalmans [Muslims] has remained.

Cause Of Death

Since 1948, Ambedkar suffered from diabetes. He was bed-ridden from June to October in 1954 due to medication side-effects and poor eyesight. He had been increasingly embittered by political issues, which took a toll on his health. His health worsened during 1955. Three days after completing his final manuscript The Buddha and His Dhamma, Ambedkar died in his sleep on 6 December 1956 at his home in Delhi.

A Buddhist cremation was organised at Dadar Chowpatty beach on 7 December, attended by half a million grieving people. A conversion program was organised on 16 December 1956, so that cremation attendees were also converted to Buddhism at the same place.

Ambedkar was survived by his second wife, who died in 2003,and his son Yashwant (known as Bhaiyasaheb Ambedkar).Ambedkar's grandson, Ambedkar Prakash Yashwant, is the chief-adviser of the Buddhist Society of India,leads the Bharipa Bahujan Mahasangh and has served in both houses of the Indian Parliament.

A number of unfinished typescripts and handwritten drafts were found among Ambedkar's notes and papers and gradually made available. Among these were Waiting for a Visa, which probably dates from 1935–36 and is an autobiographical work, and the Untouchables, or the Children of India's Ghetto, which refers to the census of 1951.

A memorial for Ambedkar was established in his Delhi house at 26 Alipur Road. His birthdate is celebrated as a public holiday known as Ambedkar Jayanti or Bhim Jayanti. He was posthumously awarded India's highest civilian honour, the Bharat Ratna, in 1990.

On the anniversary of his birth and death, and on Dhamma Chakra Pravartan Din (14 October) at Nagpur, at least half a million people gather to pay homage to him at his memorial in Mumbai.Thousands of bookshops are set up, and books are sold. His message to his followers was "educate, agitate, organise!"

Dr.Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar speech in the Parliement Watch Video :

Shrinks Two Major National Monuments

ONE OF THE MANY BEAUTIFUL SANDSTONE CANYONS WITHIN THE GRAND STAIRCASE-ESCALANTE NATIONAL MONUMENT. COLIN D YOUNG/SHUTTERSTOCK

Trump Administration Drastically Shrinks Two Major National Monuments

The Trump administration officially ordered the shrinking of two major national monuments in Utah earlier this week. The Bears Ears National Monument, which was set up by President Obama back in 2016, will be shrunk in size by 85 percent, whereas Grand Staircase-Escalante – a Clinton administration feature – will be cut by around 50 percent.

As reported by The New York Times, this loss of almost 8,100 square kilometers (3,100 square miles) is the most significant rollback in the history of protected federal lands in American history.

The Antiquities Act points out that presidents should only choose the smallest area possible in order to preserve sites of scientific or historic interest, and some landowners and conservative lawmakers have argued that recent monument designations have overreached in this regard. This latest decision, therefore, has been a cause for celebration for some.

Others – particularly Democrats, conservationists, researchers, and some Native American groups – see this as an attack on land that should remain protected. Although the land lost remains under federal control, the worry is that resource extraction will be allowed on the site – something that will almost certainly damage the surrounding environment and the tens of thousands of archaeological sites they contain.

Scientists, who often consider these monuments as living laboratories, are also dismayed by the decision. Speaking to Scientific American, several suggest that apart from important climate, palaeontological, and zoological research being upended by the actions, wildlife migration will be impacted too.

Upon hearing of the announcement, several tribes and groups of environmentalists explained to reporters that they’re going to protest the move. Some are planning to sue.

“The reductions are widely assumed to be a way to open more of these priceless landscapes to mining and drilling,” The Wilderness Society, a non-profit land conservation organization, said in a statement.

“[We] will be filing a legal challenge to this attack, and we won't be alone.”

National Monuments are protected areas, either terrestrial or marine, that are somewhat similar to national parks. Unlike the latter, which requires Congressional approval, monuments can be created by order of the President. Similarly, they can be shrunk in that way.

They stem from the 1906 Antiquities Act, which originally came about in order to protect Native American ruins. The Act also permits areas of historic or scientific interest to gain a protected status.

Today, thanks to this piece of legislation, there are 27 national monuments scattered all over the country.

Back in August, the results of an Interior Department report on the state of the country’s national monuments was widely expected to deliver bad news: the unprecedented nixing of various national monuments, along with a range of shrinkages.

The Trump administration has a terrible track record when it comes to conservation, environmentalism, and science in general – so it came as an enormous surprise that the Secretary of the Interior, Ryan Zinke, announced that all 27 national monuments would retain their status. Ominously, however, it was noted that a “handful” of them would experience boundary changes.

Now it’s clear what that meant. The White House avoids the term “shrinking” altogether in an official press release, and instead claims that their “modification” of the boundaries has created “five unique national monument units”, which simply means that the remaining protected area has been fragmented into even smaller pieces.

“The Antiquities Act does not give the Federal Government unlimited power to lock up millions of acres of land and water, and it’s time we ended this abusive practice,” the President said in a statement released by the White House.

The President himself has explicitly referred to the oft-cited federal overreach as being the driving factor behind the shrinkage decision. Similar actions at other agencies citing precisely the same concern, however, appear to just be a cover for industry-led takeovers. Will the same apply this time around?

3 LESSONS YOU WILL LEARN WHEN YOU CATCH YOUR PARTNER CH'ATING ON YOU Number 1&2 WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE

1. It’s much better to be single than it is to be unhappy in a relationship.

.If things were going very well in your relationship, then it is highly unlikely that your partner would cheat on you unless he were an actual s`` -deprived psyc`ho`ath. But again, the signs of che'ating should have been there early on. He would have been emotionally and physically distant. You would have felt a tinge of unhappiness and discontent in your relationship. \

Your chemistry was way off and you knew it deep down inside, but you were afraid to end things because you were afraid of being single and alone. But in the end, the relationship still concluded in substantial heartbreak because you didn’t have the courage to walk away.

ALSO READ? Trained Doctor, And Her Mother Dies On Their Way To Buy Items For Her Wedding Next Week (PHOTOS)

2. Keep your emotions in check.

As emotionally tumultuous as it can be to be che"ated on in a relationship, you have to learn how to keep your emotions in check. You have to be able to act rationally in a relationship and you can’t let your emotions get the best of you. You don’t want to give him any reason to label you as the “crazy girlfriend” who just makes suspicions out of thin air.

< 3. Don’t waste your tears over someone who isn’t worthy of them.

Yes, getting che"ated on can hurt. But obviously, this person didn’t care about you as much as he should have. And you shouldn’t be wasting your tears over someone who doesn’t care about you.

Scientists Peer Review The Trump Administration: "It's Gone From A War On Science To A War On Facts"

SCIENCE IS UNDER ATTACK. DROP OF LIGHT/SHUTTERSTOCK

In case you missed it, scientists are running for Congress. Largely thanks to the actions of the political action group 314 Action, academics from fields as diverse as cancer research and volcanology are gearing up to take on the climate change-denying acolytes of the Trump administration.

Back in June, we spoke to the masterminds behind this unprecedented drive to make American science great again. In the months since then, their efforts to get qualified scientists back into politics – precisely the opposite of what the current President is doing – has made giant strides forwards.

314 Action recently had a gathering in Washington DC of those on the frontline of the war on science, including researchers that are currently in power and those that were seeking office for the first time.

We at IFLScience thought this was a good opportunity to ask them to do what scientists are exceedingly well practiced in: peer review. This time around, the research focus was on the Trump administration, and it’s safe to say that they’re enraged, saddened, and aghast. As a result, they’re all the more emboldened to resist.

Here’s what some of them had to say.

Aerospace engineer Joseph Kopser tells us that the Trump administration's treatment of scientists remind him of the “hysterical witch hunts of yesteryear... the likes of which we haven’t seen since the Dark Ages.”

“We should be elevating the amazing works that scientists have accomplished throughout history and celebrating the continued accomplishments thereof – from Benjamin Franklin, to Neil DeGrasse Tyson, to the young men and woman who will pioneer the next great breakthrough.”

[next]

Kopser is running for TX-21, where Lamar Smith – the Republican Representative who is currrently is in charge of the embarrassingly anti-scientific House Science Committee – announced he is retiring from in 2018. If successful, Kosper said he “would restore science to its proper place... to ensure it’s viewed as a way to advance society, improve life, and enhance a greater understanding of our world.”

A Democratic congressman with a background in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering and a long history of supporting scientific research, Representative Paul Tonko (NY-20) thinks we’re at a flashpoint in history.

“Not since the Scientific Revolution has there been a more important moment to stand for the basic ideas that inquiry must be free and facts and evidence matter,” he tells IFLScience.

[next]

“Our economic growth depends on investing in scientists, technologists, entrepreneurs and engineers,” he highlights, explaining that “belittling the scientific community or cutting basic research will only cede our global leadership to nations that are determined to create the products and ideas of the future.”

Wary of the infiltration of industry-backed climate deniers into the federal government, Tonko recently introduced the Scientific Integrity Act, a bill that would “put a firewall” between state-funded science “and the lobbyists and industries that work tirelessly to influence or distort the scientific findings from that work.”

Citing the EPA under Scott Pruitt, the massive proposed cuts to federal science, and the withdrawal from the Paris accords, neuroscientist Dr Hans Keirstead tells IFLScience: “At every turn it has become more and more apparent that the worst-case scenario for science is unfolding before our eyes at the hands of the President.”

“It's clear the Trump Administration has no respect for the opinions of scientists,” he notes, adding that he’s running for office and sacrificing much of his scientific career so that he can “give science a voice in the halls of power, and to push back on the attacks on science.”

[next]

This world-renowned stem cell researcher is running for Congress, and is seeking to displace Dana Rohrabacher, a high-ranking Republican member of the House Science Committee. Rohrabacher is a long-time climate change denier, and recently asked NASA if there were ever alien civilizations on Mars in the last few thousand years.

“American science has always been ‘great’ – it just hasn't had a voice in Congress lately to support or defend it,” Keirstead surmises.

Scott Pruitt, the head of the EPA, is arguably one of the most dangerous operators in the US government. Rena Schild/Shutterstock

A Democratic congresswoman with an education in computer science, Representative Jacky Rosen (NV-3) has spent much of her career at the Capitol fighting for STEM education rights for girls. She’s now running for Senate against Dean Heller, the senior Republican Senator from Nevada.

“From withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accords to rolling back the Clean Power Plan, this administration is no ally to the scientific community,” she tells IFLScience.

Describing the White House’s plan to pull out of the Paris accords as an “abdication of American leadership,” Rosen says that the country “needs lawmakers in office who will fight for evidence-based policy solutions that address our country's most urgent challenges.”

Referencing her background, she suggests that Congress “should be encouraging individuals, especially young students, to become well-versed in STEM education and do more to highlight the many possibilities that a STEM education can provide.”

[next]

Proving that she’s happy to put her words into actions, Rosen has recently introduced two bipartisan bills to the House that fund STEM education for both young boys and girls.

“It's gone from a war on science to a war on facts,” said Shaughnessy Naughton, a chemical scientist and 314’s founder.

“The president is instructing Federal Agencies to ignore the science behind climate change,” she adds. “This is not only a threat to environmental and social issues but also a threat to our national security.”

Jess Phoenix, a volcanologist running for Congress, has always had strong words for the federal government, and this time round was no exception.

“Using our brains is the reason for much of America’s success. If you hobble someone’s intellect – if you tell them to not use their brains – you are making people slaves to an ideology. In this case, the ideology is profit, profit, profit,” she tells us.

“We believe what we’re fighting for. We have the courage of our conviction. All the people on the other side? All they have is profit.”

[next]

Referencing the EPA, she explains that the government is systematically dismantling it. “There will be some irreparable and irreversible damage. It’ll be on their heads, but they’ll be rich enough – or they’ll be dead – so that it won’t hurt them. But it’ll hurt our kids.”

“The current EPA under Pruitt and Trump is a perversion of the organization’s fundamental mission,” she concludes.

Another Congressional candidate, Matt Longjohn – an MD who served as National Health Director for the YMCA – feels much the same way. He strongly feels that an antidote to the Trump administration’s disparaging of science is to “prioritize investment in early childhood STEM education programs,” and to “champion the success of fact-based policies.”

“America has the best universities and the brightest minds in the world; to willingly cast aside their expertise is downright irresponsible,” Congressional candidate Roger Dean Huffstetler, chemist and tech startup CEO, tells IFLScience.

Explaining that there is a huge deficit in STEM educators in American schools, he suggests that the country needs “to do a better job educating the next generation of scientists and engineers if we are to ensure that America remains the most innovative country in the world.”

Congressional hopeful Chrissy Houlahan, an engineer and Air Force Veteran, laments that “tragically, the Trump Administration has made science a partisan issue.”

“Science is, was, and always will be great. What we need to do, as a government, is support science and leave it to the scientists and science professionals.”

It cannot be overstated that these scientists are essentially giving up their life's work in order to fundamentally alter the way the US government works. Will their rebellion prove to be successful during the 2018 midterms? That, of course, depends on what kind of America you're hoping to see: one of facts or alternative facts.

Everything To Know

-links

-links

-links

Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar Cause Of Death

Political career

Cause Of Death

Dr.Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar speech in the Parliement Watch Video :

Shrinks Two Major National Monuments

Trump Administration Drastically Shrinks Two Major National Monuments

3 LESSONS YOU WILL LEARN WHEN YOU CATCH YOUR PARTNER CH'ATING ON YOU Number 1&2 WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE

Scientists Peer Review The Trump Administration: "It's Gone From A War On Science To A War On Facts"

MKRdezign

Contact Form