While the Indian national movement is often portrayed as a monolithic struggle against British imperialism, the Dalit perspective offers a crucial counter-narrative, highlighting the complex and often contradictory experiences of marginalized communities within this broader struggle. For many Dalits, the fight for political independence from colonial rule was intertwined with, and sometimes overshadowed by, their ongoing struggle against deeply entrenched social oppression and caste discrimination within Indian society.

Leaders like Dr. B.R. Ambedkar articulated this perspective forcefully. He argued that political freedom from the British would be meaningless if it did not simultaneously dismantle the hierarchical caste system that denied Dalits basic human dignity and rights. Ambedkar believed that the primary enemy for Dalits was not just the British, but also the oppressive social structures perpetuated by upper-caste Hindus. Consequently, his focus was on securing social justice, equality, and political representation for Dalits, often through separate electorates or reserved seats, which sometimes put him at odds with the Indian National Congress's singular focus on political independence.

From the Dalit viewpoint, the national movement, particularly its early phases, did not adequately address their specific grievances. While figures like Mahatma Gandhi championed the cause of 'Harijans,' their approach was often seen by Dalit leaders as paternalistic or focused on reform within the existing caste framework, rather than its complete annihilation. The Poona Pact of 1932, where Ambedkar reluctantly agreed to joint electorates with reserved seats instead of separate electorates, is a poignant example of the compromises and tensions inherent in the Dalit struggle within the national movement. For Dalits, true 'Swaraj' meant not just self-rule from foreign powers, but also liberation from internal social tyranny, a vision that often diverged from the mainstream nationalist agenda.