Nathan Singh is deeply concerned with the curse of the caste system across different epochs in India's history, from the Vedic period to the medieval period and till the seventeenth century. Singh historicises the divisions arising from the caste system. Against this backdrop, he comments on the life, politics and policies of Chaudhary Charan Singh and sheds light on his anti-caste sentiment. In doing so, he focuses on the political context of Charan Singh's time and Singh's response to the casteist accusations levelled against him by political rivals.

Charan Singh believed that it was because of the feeling of caste superiority of Brahmins, economic exploitation by moneylenders and the ostentatious living of feudal lords that lower caste Hindus decided to convert to other religions, especially Islam and Sikhism. Until 1881, the region of Punjab was also Hindu-dominated, but in half a century it came to have Muslim majority. The primary reason was that while the upper caste Hindus exploited them, Islam embraced them. The census of 1881 and 1931 substantiates these claims. Similar transformation was witnessed in Bengal. Due to this reason, the north and east regions of India became more susceptible to communal passions. Chaudhary sahab had also realised that the task of overcoming such ascriptive differences and bringing Hindu and Muslim farmers together on material basis was done under the banner of the Unionist Party by Fazal-e-Hussain, Chaudhary Chhotu Ram, Sikandar Hayat Khan and others. These farmer leaders challenged the Congress and the communal Muslim League on economic issues, as a result of which the Congress and the League got very few seats in the general elections. This proved that the possibility of economic prosperity has the power to unite the people more than religion, caste and sect. Charan Singh realised that in the absence of substantial economic development of the subaltern, their outrage had the potential to defeat even the mightiest power.

In 1954, Singh wrote a letter to Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru "All our weaknesses arising out of economic and language-based disparities and the caste system, in my opinion, are responsible for our political subjugation and decline. The structures and sentiments of caste have magnified, resulting in a great impact on the administrative services." Singh emphasized the primacy of inter-caste marriages to eradicate caste which is rooted in endogamy. He suggested those who opt for inter-caste marriages should be given priority in recruitment to administrative services of the States and the Center. He gave a similar suggestion to Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Govind Ballabh Pant in 1953. How else to take a stand on loosening the narrow bonds of caste now rather than wait for slow reform that would take forever, if at all? Why not take dramatic steps to attack endogamy, the basis of caste exclusion?

However, like Nehru, Pant did not show any enthusiasm in this regard. Nehru rejected this suggestion considering it a threat to personal freedom. The result of this indifference was that government offices, cabinets and business institutions became centres of narrow casteism, and entry of qualified persons from other (specially middle and lower) caste groups became increasingly rare.

Having been born in a poor farming family from a middle caste, Choudhary Saheb was fully aware of the poverty of the countryside, its causes and cures. As a minister of Uttar Pradesh, he demonstrated this by making the farmers the owners of the land they cultivated. Chaudhary sahab opposed casteism at the level of conduct as well as policies. He gave land rights to the landless tenants under the Zamindari Abolition Land Reform Act. The amendments made by him greatly benefited the Harijans. Even while being in the Congress, he opposed many Congress policies. In the Nagpur session of the Congress, he opposed Nehru's proposal of cooperative farming because he believed that the necessity of cooperation would lead to lack of individual productivity, which would affect the production of food grains.

In an interview in 1980, Mrs Gandhi accused Chaudhary Charan Singh of being a casteist. She said that it was only after Charan Singh occupied a prominent position in the cabinet that casteism became pervasive in every sphere of national life. Chaudhary sahab challenged Indira Gandhi and dared her to cite even a single example of any decision taken as a minister that promoted casteism. On the question of why Mrs Gandhi accused only Charan Singh of communalism and casteism, author Nathan Singh gives a simple answer:  after Jayaprakash Narayan,  Charan Singh was the only popular leader who had moral, social and political values and a wide public base. She also knew that in the 1977 Lok Sabha elections, Chaudhary sahab was responsible for the election campaign in North India on behalf of the Janata Party and it was the result of his campaign that Congress got only one seat from Rajasthan. Nathan Singh notes that Indira Gandhi considered Chaudhary sahab to be the biggest threat to her power. In response to such allegations, it was argued in the text 'Who is a Casteist: An Analysis' that there are a few castes in the country which enjoy a monopoly over the social, economic, political, administrative and educational power. Chaudhary sahab never gave positions to members of his own caste, rather this was done during Mrs. Gandhi’s long political rule. Author Singh cites National Herald and Professor Paul R. Brass that Chaudhary Charan Singh did not get the place in Congress-dominated politics that he deserved.

Nathan Singh concludes that Charan Singh employed a cook from from the so-called Shudra caste in his house, got his daughters married into another castes, appointed an honest and capable person as the top police officer as the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, appointed a capable person from the Gujjar community as the Chairman of the Public Service Commission, appointed a capable and honest person as the Police Commissioner of Delhi and did not appoint a person from his caste to any high post, which is proof of his distance from casteist thinking On the other hand, mostpeopel in positions of power did not abandon casteist narrow-mindedness while appointing governors and ambassadors. Nathan Singh says that this makes it clear how much the hands of those who accuse Chaudhary Sahab of being casteist were stained with casteism.