Muslims and the Half-won Battle for Social Justice

This Article is published in Mainstream Vol XLVIII, No 18, April 24, 2010

The recent Supreme Court judgment, which permitted the Andhra Pradesh Government to provide four per cent reservation quota for socially and economically backward groups among the Muslims in jobs and educational institutions, is a commendable development in the battle for social justice. The earlier interim order passed by a seven-judge Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court had struck down the same law for providing quota for the Muslims with a remark that “it violated the constitutional provision forbidding faith-based quota”. However, such strategic institutional norms adopted by the High Court would never have guaranteed justice to a large majority of the oppressed sections among the Muslims. Such exclusive and strict bureaucratic mechanism eventually excludes many social groups within the Muslims from the purview of justice. The abstract rationale of secularism was utilised strictly under the normative language of communitarian ethics which swiftly abandons any critical or empirical social analysis of the society. Such compartmen-talisation of the justice doctrine has produced subjective interpretations of the idea of justice and is inadequate to end multiple oppressive inequalities operational within the Muslim society in a compound way.

In a liberal democratic state religious minorities are seen as the protected subjects under the institution of secularism. The ideal of secularism in a cumulative way expresses the commitment of the post-colonial state in India to bring justice to the differentiated religious minorities. Secularism, as a broad construction within the site of justice, offers protection to the religious minorities specifically in order to fight communalism. However, the logic of secularism is blind to the internal realities of the Muslim minority. Year after year, special commissions appointed by the Central Government have demonstrated extensively that the Muslims are sufferers with multiple kinds of social, economic and political backwardness and their empowerment can be possible only with targeted policy measures, including reservations. (The Sachar and Ranganath Mishra Commission Reports are just two important examples.)

¨

The religious minorities, especially the Muslims, are facing three important problems in post-colonial India. The first issue is related to the social marginalisation of the community by communal politics. With the rise of Right-wing fundamentalist forces, the general public psyche has been influenced with anti-Muslim feelings and contempt. The Muslims in general have to face humiliation, violence and persistent threats of communal backlash. The Christians have also faced similar kinds of attacks in recent times, especially in States like Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka. The identities of religious minorities, especially the Muslims, are stereotyped with disrespect and in a degraded manner and it is a difficult task for a Muslim commoner to gain immediate support and sympathy from the external world at the time of crises. The intellectual segment has identified the rise of communalism as the main reason behind the large scale deprivation and marginalisation of minorities in India. Secularism, as a doctrine to protect the cultural and religious autonomy of the minorities, has gone tremendously wrong in its way as a large number of people are actively participating in communal war-mongering against the religious minorities. However, as Rafiq Zakaria argues, the intellectual and political leadership still locates the remedy of the communal conflicts only in strengthening the secular socio-political forces by enlarging the democratic processes.

The second issue is of the apathy of the state in regard to the problems of minorities. The Muslims are the worst represented community in Central and State public services and a majority of them are self-employed professionals. In the political sphere, mainly Parliament, the Muslims’ representation is the lowest and has always remained below the average in most of the State Assemblies. On many indicators of development the Muslims lack behind even their SC/ST counterparts.

The third issue is related to the internal problem of the religious minorities resulting in what has been termed as ‘minorities within minorities’ in the social science discourse. All the religious communities face internal inequalities pertinent to women, caste, linguistic and class status. Among the religious minorities the question of internal injustices has not been addressed in an adequate way. The social elites of the religious minorities most of the times have defended the internal injustices on the pretext of religious autonomy, cultural tradition, unity and secularism. However in recent times, the deprived sections among the religious minorities have raised their voice against the perpetual caste discrimination and domination of social elites in various spheres of daily life. The OBC and Pasmanda Muslims have demanded special constitutional rights and protection to overcome their deprived conditions and tried to democratise the community. The Christian Dalits also have a similar argument.

¨

These three broad fragmentations of the contemporary issues describe the general condition of the religious minorities in India today. These issues are different from each other in their specific nature, claims and in locating possible solutions. Three important Reports by the National Commissions have already established these facts that the socio-economic conditions of the religious minorities have worsened since independence and therefore these groups need extra protection and support from the government. The glaring similarity among all these issues revolves round the general apathy of the Central Government in recognising the problem and in providing its immediate solution. The state had remained reluctant to assist the religious minorities with serious and effective measures fearing the communal backlash of the Hindus. Even the secular political parties and civil society groups have been reluctant to take a concrete stand, especially on the socio-economic issues of the minorities. The response of the state and the civil society has remained mechanical, passive and out of focus. In such a scenario the Supreme Court judgment is most welcome and a solace to those groups who were struggling for getting recognition by the state about their deprived conditions.

The idea of justice based on secular principles has a narrow, singular definition strictly adhering to the protection of religious minorities. Under such a closed concept of justice, the basic duty of the justice principle—to reveal the sites of social conflicts and to propose the prospects for social transformation—is missing. However, in most of the cases secularism has become a tool in the hands of the social elites to promote a collectivist and homogenous understanding of social groups and thus perpetuate their own interests and domination. In reality the society is marked by a propensity of exploitation, marginalisation and social discrimination. I would like to argue that the question relating to religious minorities should be seen historically under the discourse of social justice as the problems faced by these groups in the current situation are related to the growing social, economic and political inequalities within the community.

The current debates are inadequate in resolving the questions related to political marginalisation, social discrimination and economic backwardness of the religious minorities as these operate in the exclusive terrain of secularism. The questions raised by the religious minorities in India are primarily issues related to the institution of social justice and must be resolved by adopting newer principles of social justice. The current institutional mechanism within the social justice premise is also not adequate to deal with most of the issues raised here. In such a scenario the conclusive aim of the newly appointed Constitutional Bench which will be looking in this matter is to present certain universally applicable philosophical principles of social justice to build an inclusive response to the inadequacy of these two prime institutions.

By
Harish Wankhede

Have we forgotten the legacy of "Jai-Bhim Saptah"

New Nomenclatures- New Meanings?

Let me congratulate the current leadership of UDSF for planning such a dynamic programs for celebrating Ambedkar Birth anniversary. However I was surprised to see the omission of the title “Jai-Bhim Saptah” in the invitation. I think the current leadership is not aware about the legacy of this title that was carried under the UDSF banner for more than 8 years now. Let me tell you the cursory chronology of “Jai-Bhim Saptah” and why it is important to carry forward that legacy.

Those who have witnessed the past of Dalit students’ movement in JNU will surely recall the tremendous troubles that the leadership has undergone to really mobilize the Dalit students to come in the forefront and raise the Dalit questions in open. The celebration of Ambedkar jayanti was also marked with such inertia and in a very simple way programs on 14th April were used to be planned.

A strong shift in this approach has begun in 1998 when the current leadership decided not to celebrate the Jayanti closed doors but on Ganga Dhaba in the public view (earlier it was celebrated in Teflas, above the badminton court). This was a radical step as it needed larger participation and openness by the Dalit students to come openly at the public spaces. However the celebration was planned on the Dhaba with Ambedkar’s Portrait and other ceremonial arrangements. Sweets were also distributed.

Next year in the UDSF GBM it was decided that we will do more publicity for the Jayanti program. A theme “Towards the celebration of Ambedkar Birth Anniversary” was coined. It was decided that throughout the week seven different posters will be brought out depicting the life, history, struggles and culture of Dalit movements. It was huge success as people have first time read Namdeo Dhasal’s poem pasted on Hostel wall saying “I cursed that Mother fucking God” and gave our Dalit students great boost to celebrated the Jayanti. Same year Gail Omvedt spoke from the platform of UDSF and on 14th we also organized a ‘prabhat feri’ in the campus.

The year 2000 was an important year as this year the idea of celebrating the Jayanti as Jai-Bhim Saptah was materialized. The idea was initiated with a conscious appeal that the Dalits have no cultural space within the elitist discourses of JNU. We wanted to torment the whole JNU community with a different model of cultural assertion based on Dalit movement and their symbols. We wanted to gain a greater space in the public spaces which was otherwise dominated by secular-communal rhetoric and class struggle jargons. The idea was to plan 7 days events involving major figures, artists, leaders and common people to present a dominant picture of Dalit presence in the campus. And we did it.
The 2000 Jai-Bhim saptah witnessed 7 artistic posters on the walls of JNU, two well attended public meetings (speakers: Sukhdeo Thorat and Gadar respectively) a National Seminar on 13th, students visited the parliament to offer their tributes in front of Ambedkar’s statue and a well attended ‘prabaht feri.’ This was a new trend, where the Dalit students were independently articulated issues, programs and mobilized the students by their own. The Dalit identity as an independent whole started churning especially in this very sphere.

JaiBhim saptah was a representative voice of Dalits cultural symbols in the left bastion. Further we have tried to articulate our consciousness in that period when the right wing forces (ABVP and Patriotic Forum) was on rampage and issues of caste atrocities was almost a norm of the day. From the next year onwards it became one of the most important events for the Dalits as large number of Dalit students started invoving in the preparation of this event. On one occasion we made thousands of hand made strips (toran) of different languages (mainly Dalit slogans) and by laboring for two nights we hanged those patakas from Ganga dhaba to Tapti hostel.
The “Jai-Bhim Saptah” had its finest movements in the year 2004, when we decided to organize a national cultural program, having three cultural groups from Maharashtra, Haryana and Delhi to perform at KC OAT. This was a culmination program after having a week of events that also includes a national seminar.

The year 2005 also witnessed with another innovative idea of celebrating “Dalit Citizens Meet”. The main aim of this initiative was to bring all the important figures, celebraties , leaders and intellectuals in a combined gathering to celebrate Ambedkar jayanti.

In the later years, newer dynamics were added in “Jai-Bhim Saptah”, like book exhibition, Kavi sammelan, Night march and public celebration at Ganga Dhaba with much fun fair became the high points.

The idea behind this narration of events is to make the current UDSF leadership understand the importance of “Jai-Bhim Saptah” in mobilizing the Dalit students as a collective group. This was a conceptual idea which was coined to regain our space within the JNU campus. People have really have thought seriously in giving the celebration of Ambedkar jayanti such a shape and have devoted a lot of time and energy to build this idea. I would like to recall those student leaders whom have really worked hard to make “Jai-Bhim Saptah” a great event. Sunil Kumar (assistant professor at Wardha Hindi international University), Anup Kumar (social Activist), Umakant and Ummankathan (scholars and social activists), Smita Patil (IGNOU), Sumit Mahskar (Oxford University), Milind Awad (DU), Surendra Kumar (DU), Santosh Raut (SAA) and many others. Among the teachers Dr. Vivek Kumar, Prof. Thorat, Prof. Gopal Guru and others have shown tremendous encouragement. Rajshekhar Undroo has taken deep interest in most of the events planned during “Jai-Bhim Saptah”. (i must have not mentioned many other names which were prominent during this events)

Today when I saw the invitation, I thought that the current leadership of UDSF must have visualized something else, probably a better concept that “Jai-Bhim Saptah”. May be they don’t want to follow the same model which the earlier leadership have developed. However, my main idea here was to let them know a little about “Jai-Bhim Saptah” which has a glorifying history in the Dalit students’ movement in JNU. I hope that changed nomenclature with new attire to celebrate Ambedkar Jayanti should not take the caravan back into a new kind of inertia.

Dalit Symbolism and the Democratization of Secular Spaces

This article was published in Mainstream, 13 March 2010.

Introduction
In the recent past, wider discussion and debate have been built over the issue of mega construction works undertaken by the Uttar Pradesh (UP) Government. The intellectuals and social activists were worried over the matter that the public money was drained in such a big way to build something which blatantly represents political symbols of a particular political party. In the media also, we have noticed severe criticism against these construction works by targeting them as an ecologically dangerous project or a political gimmick over a petty emotional issue which the current government has undertaken. The critics argue that the Mayawati government in indulged in excessive immaterial symbolism without understanding and prioritizing the need of deeper social changes required for the empowerment of the Dalits and other poor. The conclusive criticism of the intellectuals and the media represents an exclusivist middle class artificiality without taking in cognizance the value of these symbols and the way in which the statues and symbols have spread historically. They negate and reduce the meanings and stakes involved for the people who mobilize around these symbols.

I believe that the main motive behind such quasi-moral and selective attack against the UP government is not as simple as explained by the critics; otherwise there are multiple other examples in which wastage of public funds is starkly visible but never became an issue of contestation in the public debates. I would like to argue that the core of the problem is located within the standards of aesthetics and the subjective interpretation of cultural history, shaped and put forward by the social elites. The symbolism crafted under the Dalit aesthetics deconstructs these given standards and provides new meanings to the public spaces.

The Usage of Dalit as Objective Appendage:
Dalit as a socio-political concept appears frequently in the contemporary discussions on Indian politics. Most of the social scientists have positively valued it as a particular and alternative perspective of some caste groups which has targeted the hegemonic domination of the modern ‘universal’ model of social progress represented by the ‘mainstream’ caste Hindus. While upholding the Dalit perspective as a radical model of social transformation, it was never granted legitimacy by the academic community as the representative voice of the subalterns within the postcolonial studies. In the study of history through this perspective, it is argued that it lacks diachronic scientificity essential for any discipline. Dalit as a collective identity was related and defined under the narrow boundaries of particularistic approach, political ideology and the beholders of alternative religio-cultural values and argued that it has limited elements to become a universal approach.

The perspectives of Dalits are stereotyped as the ideological constructs of lesser merit, and prejudiced in the general academic world as another counter voice of a passionate but irrational being. In political discourses, academic seminars and ideological debates their methods are ridiculed as infantile and criticized for lack of social consciousness which is universally applicable like the other modernist positivist ideas. This commonsensical prejudice and hate creates an understanding about the Dalit in the public reason. Such classification of Dalit perspective as lesser and other perspectives as universal, is reiterating the notion of superiority and impurity within the public discourse. The Dalits because of their dehumanized past are devalued, their capacity of thinking as individual is questioned and cunningly portrayed as the voice of the community and therefore of less merit. This is a form of academic violence which promotes casteist myths and beliefs concerning the presumed inferiority and incapability of the Dalits. Thus Dalits become a static community, prisoner of a Dalit stereotype. This is a sheer castiest attitude created by the socio-cultural norms of the society which distrusts, fears and envy the capabilities of Dalits in breaking the hegemonic modernist constructions built by the upper caste elites of the Indian society.

Most of the Dalit Thinkers are also content with such analysis and have internalized ‘Dalit’ as a separate perspective with a limited audience to address. They candidly admit the inferiority of Dalit perspective in competence to the popular mainstream discourses. They also lack the courage to assert Dalit perspective as competent method of analysis and hurriedly embrace the hegemonic academic codes of the upper Caste Hindus. The desire to be the part of collective mainstream academic circle or to become ‘general’ or ‘universal’; this is a process of Sanskritization which is unknowingly adopted by most of the Dalit thinkers. I will call it Brahmanization of the Dalit Minds. Under such adopted commonsensical model of ‘Particular and Universal’, the Dalits are ghettoized and condemned as incapable, incompetent to produce sociological theories, meta-narratives, and universal symbols of inclusivity. Even the democratic appeal of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) for a sarvajan empowerment is scrutinized with a critical hypothesis that the possibility of such maneuvering is less as the leadership has the history of deep indulgence with the empowerment of a specific social group or to enlarge its petty political success.

Such gross misrepresentations of the Dalits reduce them to an identified collective category in the academic community, having single agenda of constructing the ‘other’ (Manuvadi, Brahmin, Upper Castes, Hindus etc.) and charge against this enemy for the unjust and unequal relationships perpetuated in the society. Dalit perspective is therefore allegedly criticized by the mainstream academic community for finding solace and comfort in continuous representation of their dehumanized past in the modern world. Dalits are incapable to provide inclusive symbolisms, universally sensitive, transcendental philosophical model for a better world because they are deeply rooted and entrenched in the ‘other’ and all its academic interventions are peripheral only to their own self obsessed constructed center. The Dalit perspective is not even seen as a representative counter argument of the socially excluded groups. This perspective which has a distinct experiential epistemology because of its social particularity was never acknowledged in a fair manner. The Dalit perspective has further substantiated these arguments of unfairness by explaining the livid experiences of their degraded social presence and how the given traditionalist and nationalist nomenclatures are insufficient to address their concerns.

The New Claimants of Historical Knowledge:
Such discriminatory treatment is visible further when it comes to the valorization of the national leadership. Indian history is inseparable from its brahmanical origin and it necessarily imposes a tacit version of cultural and political history over the people. Brahmanism is seen under the Dalit perspective as the ideological and institutional system which forcefully monopolizes knowledge and power by excluding and dominating other social groups of the society. The elites have constructed historical knowledge by making Gandhi as National and Ambedkar as Particular icon when they were at the helm of political affairs. Such claims that belittle the contributions of the leaders of social struggles operate under a superior caste psyche which eventually regards the upper caste leadership as national and others as specific regional or caste icons. Therefore, breaking such ideological construction is an essential prerequisite for the contemporary Dalit perspective. The reconstruction of history is necessary to ignite the minds of ignorant masses as they are mentally enslaved through the extensive integrationist symbolisms of social elites. By mobilizing the masses on alternative symbols, the Dalit perspective has historically tried to defeat the philosophical foundations of brahmanical elites. Today, post democratic churning of six decades, a representative Government led by BSP is aspired to build an alternative consciousness by making Ambedkar, Jyotiba Phule and Shahu Maharaj as true National leaders.

The stereotypical humiliated Dalit image needs a make over in the current juncture of democratic spaces to represent themselves as equal citizens and these symbols have the capacity to transform the Dalit image in a very positive way. Public acceptance of alternative cultural and religious symbols reemphasize the Dalit presence as the independent beholders of organic knowledge and challenges the hegemonic social norms that locate them as abnormal appendage to the great Hindu tradition. Such motivated effort hurts most of the intellectuals and social activists because it demands a different language and thought process to understand the social reality in which they feel very uncomfortable. To avoid the debates on caste and its current value in the political circle, the critics are trying to mobilize people on symbols which they believe are secular, universal and acceptable to the traditional standards of aesthetics. The rise of Dalit politics is consistently seen as an attack against the secular and collectivist abstract standards of the upper caste imagination and avoids understanding of the this assertion through a subjective ethical argument crafted by the Dalits.
Construction of an alternative vision of Indian History has been seen as an essential entity within the Dalit perspective. The symbolic assertions by inventing popular myths, folk heroes, and cultural attributes related to the pride of the socially depraved people are reconstructing historical narratives with a futuristic vision. Such historical imagination deconstructs the brahmanical notions of history and become a decisive force to mobilize subalterns around the renewed collective identities. The recent politics of Bahujan Samaj Party of erecting grand monumental structures on the name of Dalits and other Bahujan leaders is a medium to propose an assertive positive identity which can be utilized to illuminate the minds of socially oppressed sections from their invert negative psyche which they have internalized under the caste based oppressive social order of the present times. Such occupation of public space also legitimizes their claim over the knowledge of history and consecutively formulates an argument for a greater democratization of history through subaltern perspectives.

The mainstream subjectivity has consistently represented Dalits as dependent objects by its specified nomenclatures. As a result, Dalits were consistently denied the status of subject and were always represented by others as submissive category parasitically attached to the paternalistic brahmanical normality. Subversion to such negative instrumentality of social identity as seer object becomes the revolutionary élan within the Dalit perspective. It not only deconstructs the Dalit identity as empowered one but also demands mainstream space to become equal subject with the capacity to re-associate and negotiate with the given objects.
Value of Symbols:

The contemporary political period is a terrain of democratic contestations as history is reviewed by multiple claims, intentions and ideological persuasions. Historical narratives are seen as a social capital which is utilized by the intellectual junta to develop a concrete consciousness about the past. The Dalits are the new entrants in this knowledge system with a poised motive to debrahmanize history in a radical way; however their efforts are criticized in the crudest way in most of the public debates.

The symbolism based on naming, statues, memorials, awards etc. stands as a major feature of the Dalit movement in India. The conjecture is that the imposition of such icons through statues and other symbols in public places can contribute to develop an understanding among public by which the oppressed sections are projecting their model of alternative state, nation, culture and political philosophy. These statues seem to be the focal point for renewed aspirations towards democracy and equality, while the ceremonies organized around them have provided these oppressed citizens the opportunities to assert a sense of their presence in the social and cultural life. The iconization of Dalit Heroes in public is the most assertive gesture of growing democratic consciousness of the socially deprived sections as these groups were perpetually excluded from all the claims of human rights and dignity. The erected symbols are embedded with a set of progressive values and radical contents which educate and organize the socially deprived sections at one level and also consequently challenge the hegemony of social elites with equal power.
The classical left critics have adopted a normative comparison claiming that such aesthetics is rooted into bourgeois tactics and hardly provides any material benefits to the poor. Such diachronic distinctions between material and aesthetics values and prioritizing the prior over the other have consciously undermines the embedded values of these symbols for bringing radical social change in the public psyche. The value of these symbols is rested with its capacity to deconstruct the socio-cultural hegemony of the social elites and in providing democratic spaces to the voices which were raised in favor of socially deprived sections. Of course, neither these symbols are going to quench the material thirst of the Dalits nor questions pertaining to their degraded economic conditions will be sorted out by this. However, the primary objective of the Dalit movement is not restricted only with the agenda of economic welfare but it has consciously modeled itself as the movement aiming to achieve self respect and dignity for the socially deprived sections. Therefore, the claims over public spaces represent one crucial political aspect of the contemporary Dalit agenda through which a more democratic redistribution of the secular spaces is demanded in order to demonstrate the respectable and equal presence of Dalits, as the builders of modern society.
The new monuments constructed in UP represent an alternative symbolism, radically different from the normally adopted values, political beliefs and standards of secular public symbols to which the critics had adhered so meaningfully. These symbols directly hurt the pride and prestige of the elites who have historically constructed most of the national symbols and claim for its universality in the public. The social elites have valued history with a romantic broadening and have even included popular myths and folklores as valid historical contents. In the past, the valorized history of the social elites was not even open to any hermeneutic analysis and any attempt which tries to democratize history was craftily dismissed. The symbolism constructed by the UP government has the capacity to dethrone the hegemony of abstract elitist standards of public and national symbols with its aggressive alternative representation. These symbols, including that of Mayawati’s statue, have a tremendous appeal among the oppressed sections as they look upon these statues with a poised aspiration that will bring social empowerment, dignity and justice.

Conclusion:
The debate over the erection of Dalit symbols at the public spaces is burdened under the middle class reflexivity and therefore the critics do not understand the ethical values supplemented by these statues. The statues explain the unheard claims of Dalits to become the integral part of normal public life which was historically denied to them. It provides new meaning to the secular spaces by democratizing it in a substantive way. These symbols have demonstrated that the Dalits are avowed with concentrated reflexive agency having the capacity to promote the group as equal beholders of the public spaces.

By
Harish S Wankhede

Saffronizing Dalit Culture

Book Review:
Fascinating Hindutva: Saffron Politics and Dalit Mobilisation
Author: Badri Narayan
Sage Publications,
Year: 2009
Pages: 195
ISBN: 978-81-7829-906-8

Badri Narayan’s works on identity formation and politics always have a classical narrative method in which the political usage of local stories, folk myths and oral history are scrutinized to draw conclusions. In his recent book Fascinating Hindutva: Saffron Politics and Dalit Mobilisation he has explore the challenging terrains of Dalit mobilization tactics of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) - Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) combine. This is an appropriate time for this book as the Lok Sabha elections are round the corner and in this context it examines the new political strategies of the saffron brigade in the caste ridden social spaces of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
The modern democratic polity in India has provided an influential space to the political, social and economic aspirations of the Dalits. The Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) as the new representative voices of the socially oppressed groups has restructured and constructed new meanings to the social history of the Dalits and succeeded in mobilizing them for its political benefits. A calculative emergence of new cultural symbols, caste heroes and social myths among the Dalits have provided a new self esteem and respect to the deprived sections, which later were transformed by the BSP for its political mobilizations. Narayan argues that this strategy of Dalit mobilization of the BSP almost became a compulsion for the BJP to dilute its Nationalist meta-narrative usage of Brahmanical symbols in order to mobilize the Dalits into the Hindu fold. It is an interesting reading as it meticulously documents the pertaining social identity questions and its overt politicization.
The author describes the internal complexities of the BJP while forming this new strategy. Narayan argues that the trajectory of the hindutva forces from the idea of mass mobilization of all Hindus as one collective identity towards galvanizing the local cultural heroes and symbols is a tactical move by the RSS and Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP). (p. 19) The BJP has understood that the myth of Ram Temple has lost its political value and in the changed conditions as a part of political strategy individual castes and group mobilization became an obligation. The adopted tactics resembles the political strategy of the BSP; however the BJP has utilized it with more conscious articulations. It has linked the small popular myths of Brahmanical past (like Savari, Eklavya, Suhaldev, Nishadraj, Kalu Dheewar, etc) to the cultural aspirations of the deprived sections and provided them a new sense of belongingness. This tacit model of mobilization preserves the upper caste domination and presents the Dalit caste as traditional subservient allies.
Narayan narrates with large empirical evidences the new tactics of the BJP for mobilizing some specific Dalit castes in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. The political consciousness amongst Dalits has been restricted within the influential castes like Chamars and Paswans. Large sections of the Dalit population still operate their social and cultural practices under the hinduized upper caste norms. Narayan argues that the BJP has tapped these ruminants of the Brahmanical pasts among these castes like Nishads, Musahars, Valmikis and Dusadhs and consciously saffronized their local cultural values, folk histories and caste heroes. Importantly Narayan also analyze how the propagated value of hindutva has been constructed with rabidly anti-Muslim clout. He demonstrated how the BJP communalizes the social spaces during the celebrations programmes named after the local heroes of the Dalits
Dalits have remained excluded from the socio-cultural heritage of the Hindus. As an alternative the Dalits have developed a set of cultural symbols to subvert the dominant brahmanical values. BJP’s move to legitimize and glorify these folk traditions of the Dalits demonstrates the growing desire to bring them under the Hindutva umbrella. Interestingly, Narayan also argues that the BJP’s political strategy has an inclusive appeal which attracts specific Dalit castes as they also seek acceptance from the upper caste Hindus.
This book will be an important resource for the students of social science especially for those interested in Dalit politics. It is a lucid ethnographic description of popular Dalit folk stories and its political relationships. Mousami Majumdar’s translations of the narratives/poems from the local dialect into English are simple and do provide the real essences of the stories. On the critic front, Narayan reiterates the objective of the book several times without substantiating it with newer arguments. He has not labored enough to discover the secular and progressive folk narratives available in the same traditions. He also failed to demonstrate the reasons for the rapid decline of the BJP as main political party in these regions, even when they have adopted newer strategies to mobilize these unconventional groups. Further it lacks the theoretical engagements and the observations are heavily based on locally rooted empirical evidences.

By-
Harish S Wankhede

Exclusion and Discrimination: The Status of Dalits in India Today

Book Review

Dalits in India: Search for Common Destiny

Author: Sukhadeo Thorat

Publication: Sage Publications, New Delhi

ISBN: 978-0-7619-3573

(Published in Financial Express, Jun 14, 2009)

Prof. Sukhadeo Thorat has established himself as one of the pioneering economist working on the issues of discrimination and marginalization of the Dalits and Tribals in the varied economic spheres. His latest work Dalits in India: Search for Common Destiny is another important contribution in this field.

Dalits are the erstwhile untouchable caste or the current Scheduled Castes (SCs). These castes suffered perpetual social discrimination, economic exploitation and political marginalization. Acknowledging such grave injustice, many reformers, political activists and leaders waged relentless struggle for the empowerment of these deprived masses. As the result of many vibrant social movements, the independent nation-state in India has provided these castes multiple policies of affirmative action, special safeguards and other rights to overcome their depraved conditions.

Thorat’s Book analyzes the changes and impacts stimulated by state’s public policies on the conditions of the Dalits. He examines the current status of the Dalits especially in the last three decades by providing a vast statistical database on multiple indicators of growth. According to the author the main objective of this book is to present the economic and social status of SCs, to study the changes in their status with respect to important indicators of human development and to provide a policy direction for the empowerment of Dalits.

Thorat argues that the agricultural sector has remained discriminatory towards the Dalits. They consistently suffered discrimination with respect to land, labour and capital. Thorat presented a comprehensive data to show that a small section has access to land and a miniscule section cultivates it. However as the wage labourers they are almost twice to other social groups. He argues that there are discriminatory disparities which must be ended by a responsive policy framework. At the all India level the Dalits also remained poorer in comparison with other social groups. Thorat argues that the greater dependency of SCs on agriculture for livelihood, mainly as landless labours with low wage rates has created the condition for such chronic poverty. Such discriminatory disparities remained also in the educational sectors. Even though there is a significant rise in the literacy rate among the SC, their participation in elementary and higher education lagged behind significantly in comparison with the non-SC/ST counterparts. Further from his studies on the health status of the Dalits Thorat claims that the health conditions of the SCs is really poor and more deprived in comparison with other sections of the population. Almost on all the indicators of health, the SC suffers worst kind of inaccessibility with the basic health care facilities like maternity and immunisation.

The most significant part of Thorat’s book is his extensive study on the current nature of discrimination and widespread practice of untouchability in various spheres of public life. He argued that social discriminations like non-access to tea shops, denial of water facilities, denial of barber and washer men’s services, ban on marriage procession on roads, denial of right to seat with the upper caste and other such practices are still reluctantly observed in many states. Further, the labour market is also blotted with such practices through exclusion and discrimination in hiring, wage payments and as low as preventing Dalits from selling in local market.

On the positive side Thorat analyzes that the economic conditions of the Dalits have relatively improved in the government sectors because of the reservation policy. The percentage of employment of the SC employees in the government sector has increased in average up to seventeen percent. However, he explains that most of the SC representation in the government jobs is in the lower cadre groups of C and D and the quota policy in the A and B cadre jobs has not been implemented fairly. In his conclusion, Thorat projects the necessary framework of new policy imperatives to bring further empowerment among the Dalits. Apart from the existing system of reservation, the new policy must articulate the newer demands by the Dalits in the changed socio-economic milieu.

The book provides rich empirical evidences with insightful analysis on the status of Dalits in contemporary India. In the critical sphere, it lacks the theoretical objective for Dalit emancipation as it looks upon the state as the sole instrument for the welfare of the Dalits. However, this book stores valuable information necessary for the students, academicians and policy makers concerned with Dalits and their empowerment.

By-

Harish S Wankhede

Rewriting History

(This is the review of the Kancha Ilaiah's new Book "Post-Hindu India" Sage Publications, New Delhi. This review was published in Financial Express on Sunday, Dec 20, 2009)

Rewriting History

The contemporary political period is a terrain of democratic contestation as history is reviewed by multiple claims, intentions and ideological persuasions. Socio-historical narratives are seen as a necessary capital which is utilised by the intellectual junta to develop a concrete consciousness about the past in order to claim their legitimate space in the present. The Dalit-Bahujans are the new entrants in this knowledge system with a poised motive to debrahmanise history in a radical way by applying epistemological tools derived from their social experiential past. Kancha Ilaiah, one of the important contributors within this discourse, in his recent work, locates the difference between the dominant brahmanical values and the emerging consciousness among the Dalit-Bahujans on the basis of certain ethical concerns. His latest work, Post-Hindu India is a journey to explore the nature of social communities in Andhra Pradesh, which periodically provides a generalised picture of India's contesting social realities.

The core premise of his argument is based on the formation of a communitarian robust selfhood of the depressed castes in comparison with the obsessive individualism of the Brahmanic self. He uses rich empirical evidences to argue that some tribals have devoted their lives to enhance human capabilities in several ways. They adhere to scientific temperament and their social milieu is highly egalitarian with little offshoots of patriarchal domination. These passionate judgments prove the parasitic nature of Brahmin castes in particular and upper castes in general. He argues that the exclusivity of brahmanic nature has created caste as the divisive force and consciously condemned the productive labour forces as impure, degraded and inhumane beings to perpetuate their control over the society. The usage of new metaphors such as spiritual fascists to demonstrate the social psyche of Brahminism is innovative.

The Dalit-Bahujan perspective judges the popular interpretations of India's past as another attempt to camouflage the realities of social relationships. The author argues that the projected Hindu spiritual universe is crudely fascistic and crafted under the leadership of brahmanical elite to avoid dialogue over religious superstitions, patriarchy, and caste exploitation. He tries to build a collective Dalit-Bahujan perspective on Indian culture which attacks the operative dominant elements within society and engages in the discourse of reinventing alternative non-Hindu perspectives of culture and tradition. He assumes that it helped them (especially the OBCs) in strengthening their autonomous identity, acquiring self confidence and in carving out a new growth path. It also presents a possible roadmap on what would be the driving force to constitute a future Indian society in a democratic and egalitarian fashion. In this process the author lays the foundation for a transformation of the caste-cultural consciousness among the Dalit-Bahujans, with the aim to wage a final revolutionary battle to annihilate the dominant social psychology of brahmanical system.

The book is a passionate attempt to quench the thirst of the activists who hope for a social revolution. It is a commendable work that utilises wide anthropological resources to bring forth a variety of productive tools, customs and food habits of the Dalit Bahujan communities. Excluding some factual errors eg Manipur is a Christian majority state (page xx) and South Korea is a socialist country (page xvii) and using degraded terms like chandala to notify Dalits (page 237) the book sincerely problematises the notion of Hinduism in a provocative way. It has the capacity to generate a debate over this very notion.

by-
Harish S Wankhede

Politics of Silence: Reservation, Brahmanical 'Merit' and Hegemony

Of late there has been an interesting development over the issue of reservation in the JNU campus, the same campus which claims to be the flag bearer of progressive and egalitarian ideology. Paradoxically and also expectedly this interesting development has been put under the carpet and there is a conspicuous absence of response from the so called revolutionaries (teachers and students).

So, here goes the story of that particular development: The JNU Academic Council held a meeting on 23 November 2009 and passed a resolution against reserving the position for SC, ST and PH candidates at the level of Associate professor and Professor. Surprisingly, no one in the academic council has raised their voices against such an anti-democratic and regressive decision. The main issue raised by some of the faculty members of the anti-reservationist lobby is regarding the consequences of reservations on the academic ‘merit’ of the university. According to them, “this step has very serious implications for the long term academic development of this premier university”.

It has been long standing tradition to oppose the policy of representation to the deprived sections by using the pet language of ‘merit’. How do these self proclaimed protectors of ‘academic excellence’ define merit? Is ‘merit’, for them, intimately attached only to the people from the upper castes? Or, are they scared of losing their monopoly over the academia? Moreover, with regard to the ‘merit’, what kind of work they have produced which could very well fit in the league of merit? The most relevant question here is to ask who decides the ‘criteria of merit’? Historically, merit has been promoted as a possession of the upper castes and till date the hegemony over the criteria of merit persists with them. The concerns for the ‘safety of merit’ from the degradation through reservation are actually not for merit but for the maintenance of the hegemony. While the faculty has chosen to remain silent on this issue, the self proclaimed revolutionary left student organizations have also decided to walk on the same path (of course how can they betray their gurus!).

Left movement has a very notorious history of ignoring important the problem of caste throughout their various struggles. International issues are brought to the forefront with much ease and comfort. Whereas vital issues concerning the lower strata of the society are either ignored or are dealt in a half-hearted way, that is symbolically. The colonial history of India would be the best testimony of their lack of interest towards anti-caste struggles. To demonstrate one example, when Ambedkar was leading mass struggle against the landlord system (Khoti system) and Mahar Vatan, the communist movement of India kept their usual silence on this issue. The unfortunate part is that the prejudice towards the lower strata has not gone yet from their minds.

The reservation policy is not only a means of giving representation to the deprived but also it plays a very important role in the process of democratization of society. The reservation at higher academic level is important because it assures the representation of certain social sections that has been disadvantaged for centuries. By confining reservation policy at the level of Assistant Professor, on what terms does this policy assume that caste of any particular candidate is attached only till he/she is an assistant professor? Does caste discrimination vanish after that? On one end the ‘revolutionary red’ campus has been consistent in its rhetoric of changing the world and yet they have stuck with their upper caste consciousness.

We strongly condemn the anti-democratic, anti-progressive position taken by the faculty members of JNU. Equally condemnable is the silence of JNUSU and the student organizations.

sd/-

Prabodhan, Santosh, Pramod, Shivadatta, Yashpal, Rohidas, Kshipra, Shivshankar, Gaurav, Amardeep, Baburao