Caste Matters

by Suraj Yengde

Du Bois, on the other hand, wanted the Black population to acquire positions of eminence in arts, literature, academia and other forms of cultural, moral and intellectual endeavours. He wanted them to first acquire higher human dignity that would prevent society from compelling them into subordinate jobs. He laid this out neatly in a survey of the American post-reconstruction era in a widely circulated paper, ‘The Economics of Negro Emancipation in the United States’ (1911). Du Bois placed emphasis on the Black labour that was systematically disenfranchised and exploited by the American south which found a way through political power, courts, treachery, cheating, wage contracts (which was used as a tool to keep Black labour in check and exploit it under the rubric of law) and notorious legislations to subjugate it.11 The southern White capital was able to do this ‘under the cry of race prejudice’ that was already in action in the United States. Du Bois wanted to elevate Black people from the prescribed subservient position on to their deserving larger human capacities. This is similar to the idea of Ambedkar who wanted Untouchables to leave the hamlets that were the site of traditional caste-mandated occupations. In one of his speeches in 1943 to a Marathi-speaking audience, Ambedkar suggested breaking the taboo by adorning new and clean clothes and embracing a style that would offset the aversion imposed on Untouchables by the dominant-caste gaze. A year earlier, in Nagpu...

The ground for contemporary Dalit capitalism is identical to what Washington had proposed for Blacks and what Du Bois vehemently opposed. The vested interest of privileged caste capital can be on the verge of being toppled if does not collaborate with the marginally powerful and demographically active populace. But the projection of DICCI and the likes as the sole proprietor of the modern Dalit project only harms the real Dalitdom that struggles to survive in an extremely unequal market-based society.

Would this gesture of drawing capital from state resources ever qualify as capitalism in the neo-liberal form of economic arrangement? Especially if the businesses that are offered to Dalits are predetermined by their caste occupations, viz., the leather business, management of farming and production and manufacturing of caste-centric social economics, would it be correct to declare the caste blindness of capitalism?

Aseem Prakash’s study of Dalit capitalism shows that Dalits continue to undergo multilayered exclusion.19 The economy is situated within dense structures of society. The social mandate decides economic functioning. The community networks that often work in the entrepreneurial chain are not in favour of Dalits. This affects Dalit capital owners doubly: first, due to the lack of Dalits in the network chain they are unable to cross over easily, and second, dominant-caste entrepreneurs use their own networks to keep Dalits from accessing the market. When it comes to taking bank loans and dealing with other state-owned institutions, Dalits have to undergo humiliation only to finally be left with one option: being co-opted by dominant-caste capital. In these partnerships, the dominant-caste person uses his/her influence to command business prospects while doing little work compared to the Dalit. In this transaction too, the ‘social relations’ that Kancha Ilaiah argued about in his Post-Hindu India are absent.20 Social relations are important to regulate the dominance of caste hegemony in the foundation of capitalism. In the absence of established social relations there is limited scope for empathizing with other caste groups. Due to the lack of conversation with other groups in a commercial exchange, the buyer and the seller, the worker and the owner do not have reasons to establish norms of human relationality, thereby deepening the ignorance of other group. Therefore, in the a...

Growing wage gaps and loosening of state control over public resources and public capital put marginalized sections like Dalits at the threshold of insecurity.

The fact that Banias are a benefactor of the caste system advocates the unquestionable rationality of class suppression combined with caste as a surplus value. Banias in colonial times were the oppressors who contributed to the empire’s expansion in the Indian subcontinent, more so than in the African countries. Banias were the middlemen who dealt in the indomitable parlance of advancing one’s interests. However, the nationalist history of India overwhelmingly lauds the Bania capitalist class as a benefactor of the nationalist movement, thereby declaring them as supporters of the movement when it was not an altruistic dedication at all. On the contrary, it was to exploit the resources of a newly independent nation on their own terms without external colonial intervention. Vladimir Lenin describes this position as being midway between the radical’s and worker’s struggle.

The traditional arena of business capital deals with the accumulation of wealth acquired fraudulently by exploiting working-class communities.

The immediate oppressor, who is an agent of the global corporate invasion, gets away, and our entire focus shifts to the owners; even though the managers are also oppressors in their own right.

The process of accumulation begins with embracing corrupt and unethical practices. The concepts of redistribution and accountability of earned wealth are not within the realm of caste capitalism. When the Dalits who have despised the dominant-caste usurper their entire lives see their own kind doing the same, it would have difficult consequences. In the traditional caste set-up, Dalits were kept away from dominant-caste spaces; however, when the Dalit capitalist lives in the same area as the dominant castes and indulges in similar ritual practices, he/she would not be easily forgiven for their exploitative status by exploited Dalits. This move by Dalits is only going to recast the structure of oppression to accommodate it within the domain of accepted institutions. There is little revolutionary forethought for the structural remaking which every oppressed society seeks to eventually achieve. It would be a disguised self-deception to imagine that a peripheral entity placed on the margins can counter the philosophy of traditional oppression. Capitalism’s deceptive embrace will augment the efforts of canonized Dalits who want to operate within the Brahminical system as silent partners. This will eventually redirect the blame on to Dalits, who will yet again be held solely responsible for their suffering. In the words of Du Bois, in the context of the African Americans, this kind of system would ‘shift the burden of the Negro problem to the Negro’s shoulders and stand aside as...

distant social relations operating in a caste society.

The fight against bourgeois nationalism and neo-liberalism has failed in India. Bourgeois nationalism firmly believes in the ownership and rulership of a few elites over the large exploited mass. The bourgeois nationalism that we inherited was inherent to the dialectic materialism with a strong force of caste sentimentality that was translated into landlordship—feudalism by granting lands to certain agrarian castes, thereby ensuring the retention of the caste structure. By the maintenance of caste, kings, Brahmins and Banias all benefited. However, to effect the control of caste, dominance had to be continued upon lower castes, who were the primary recipients of caste hierarchy. And to do that the person closest to the lowest structure but higher in the hierarchy was detailed with the privilege of ownership of land and everything that was present on it—the tiller’s toil, the surplus, the pasture and cultivation. On the other hand, neo-liberalism taps into the existing loosened social structure of a society to make inroads, and validates the position of the oppressive ruling class. This helps neo-liberalism bring the exploiter on its side. It has so far not been able to involve Dalits alongside Muslims and other minorities in its fold. No one is willing to identify the traditional mercantile castes as an important agent in executing the exploitation of the poor and working class in India. Farmer suicides in India are largely due to the caste–capital nexus. Historically, and...

we all live in a world that is ‘a combination of unearned advantage and unearned disadvantage in life’.3 Many people on the side of privilege seldom see privilege as it is visible to the naked eye shrouded within the artefacts of material culture. There is a blindfolding when it comes to privilege. It is seen as an exterior element, attributable to the lavish expenditure of only the elite class. It is never personalized, nor looked at as something which one harbours in day-to-day life. One is quick to present oneself in the garb of victimhood when the question of privilege is raised.

The structural issues of class, gender and caste are presented to us without adequate emphasis on recognizing one’s own privilege. Therefore, the struggle against an oppressive system simply gets passed on, becomes a problem of the Other. The invisible Others are made responsible for curbing the mayhem in society without accounting for one’s personal responsibility in perpetuating it.

The first contingent of Gautama Buddha’s monks were Brahmins. This was one of the first minority groups that accepted the egalitarian ethos of the time by going against their kith and kin.

It is widely misunderstood that ‘Brahmin’ is a homogeneous category. On the contrary, it is hugely divided along approximately 500 sub-castes, class and regional lines. Addressing a conference hosted by the Belgaum District Depressed Classes in 1929, Ambedkar referred to the hegemony of Maharashtrian Brahmins in the political affairs of the state. He placed the Brahmins of other provinces, viz., Gujarat, Punjab and United Provinces, to a lower economic ranking compared to the dominating peshwas.5 The RSS, which remains an unregistered organization, is single-handedly controlled by the Maharashtrian Kharade Brahmins.6 The Brahmins from other states and sub-castes undergo subordination at the hands of dominant-caste Brahmins,7 whose suffering does not feature in the popular discourse.

What India consumes today in the form of news is basically Brahmin propaganda. A study by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) found that in 2008 ‘[t]op Upper Castes’—the Brahmins—had an 85 per cent share in key media positions, compared to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, which was nil.

In current times, Robin Jeffery’s detailed study of India’s print media, entitled India’s Newspaper Revolution (2009), found no Dalit representation in the newsroom and on the editorial board of 300 media decision-makers. Similarly, Washington Post South Asia bureau chief Kenneth Cooper had discovered back in 1996 that over 4000 Indian newspapers published in 100 languages hardly had India’s lower castes, mostly Dalits, represented. ‘Not one daily newspaper has made speaking on their behalf its role,’ Cooper commented, drawing from his experience of reporting from India for over two decades.

The value of a Dalit is priced according to the number of dead Dalits. Egregious atrocities that get reported invite Dalit panelists. However, Dalits do not feature in debates on environmental issues, climate change, economic affairs, planning commissions, media analysis, film and television, feminism discussions, LGBTIQA issues, communalism, political commentary or foreign matters; they are not seen offering sociological, economic, political and cultural insight to any particular problem.

The issue of scandals and corruption in India is endemic. The major national scandals are birthed and anchored largely by the dominant-caste groups, but its blame is often flung towards the non-privileged caste groups. The infamous 2G corruption scandal of the UPA-2 government was widely reported. A. Raja, a Dalit lawmaker from Tamil Nadu, was the prime accused in the case. During the widespread allegations, Raja’s Dalit identity was often invoked to reinforce his corrupt caste character. Similar targeted accusations have been directed in the past against Mayawati, Lalu Prasad Yadav, Madhu Koda, Shibu Soren and other SC, ST and OBC elected lawmakers. In the same vein, however, the caste of corrupt dominant-caste leaders was never brought up. Their corruption was not seen as a representation of their caste character, only of their individual character. A simple google search of ‘corrupt politicians in India’ will mostly direct you to SC, ST and OBC leaders.

The new language of political casteism is corruption. Corruption is equated with Dalit and lower-caste practices. This is why the 2011 anti-corruption movement in India was able to successfully galvanize the otherwise apolitical or ‘neutral’ educated urban class. It launched the careers of many dominant-caste wannabe politicians. The corruption of politicians was held as a primary target. Along with the political class, the judiciary was also declared corrupt. Of all the chief justices, only one was targeted by his name and caste:12 K.G. Balakrishnan, the first Dalit chief justice of India and the former chief of the National Human Rights Commission. Such is the fate of Dalit elites in positions of power. They continue to be haunted by their caste, regardless of their achievements. And it is the visible Dalits who are the first to receive negative attention. They are most unwelcome in liberal spaces of democracy. Thus, we witness baseless accusations and falsified stories being floated against Dalits in public spheres.

It appears that the dominant castes who have access to caste networks and social capital use them to loot the country without any accountability. The investigative agencies, political class and bureaucracy that complete the nexus work to conveniently let them off the hook.26 In addition to the corruption by these dominant-caste groups, there are plenty of landed caste groups who are seen as neo-Kshatriyas. Given the extent of their wealth, they might easily jump a rung or two up the ladder to acquire neo-Bania status. A simple google search reveals the large amounts looted by thugs from public sector banks, thereby punishing taxpayers by increasing taxes to recover the looted amount.

The government, which allowed banks to hand over public money to defaulters, is now using the public money to keep the structure of the corrupt sector intact, without solving the deeper problem and using it for social welfare relief programmes for the needy and vulnerable. Taxpayer money is not available to them in the form of loans or credit lending for building small businesses. The fraudulent acts are still not seen as crimes by the court of law but as a matter of civic dispute. Most defaulters are acquitted by the court or are living rich lives as celebrities.

In this corruptible morass, we see some judges catching up too. The exposé of the judiciary’s involvement in the land allotment case is one such instance. The Karnataka State Judicial Department Employees House Building Cooperative Society offered plots at huge subsidies to the court employees. The nobility of certain dominant-caste judges came to dust when they applied for the plots against the orders of the Supreme Court, and later handed over their 500 times more expensive plots to family members.

Arguably, it focused on liberating the oppressed masses through education and social movements. It did not place the onus on Brahmins as other reformist Brahmin-led movements of the time did. The Brahmo Samaj, Prarthana Samaj and later Arya Samaj believed in the sacredness of the Gita, which Phule viewed as merely a political treatise designed to keep the oppressed masses within the shackles of the religious order.

Its work was peasant-centric, along with other social reform projects like widow remarriage, abolition of child marriage, abolition of untouchability, spread of education, opening of centres for prevention of infanticide, creating incentives for the free education of poor students, including scholarships, and open opposition of the Brahmin order.

It is reported that the burning of the Manusmriti was a suggestion made by Ambedkar’s Brahmin comrade, Sahasrabuddhe.61 Like Sahasrabuddhe, there is a list of impressive Brahmin and ‘upper’-caste individuals who rallied behind Ambedkar and chose him as their ideal leader.

Sahasrabuddhe was a forthright radical who saw the paradox of those belonging to the touchable castes who expressed sympathy with the Dalit cause, but on the other hand did not actively participate in the struggle.

Shridharpant Tilak,

caste is also about inherited privilege and dominance that is unaccounted for. This picture of the beneficiaries of casteism is not presented to the world. It is as much an issue for Brahmins and other castes as much as it is for Dalits, as the system would not exist with a single caste—the caste system is relational.

Caste cartography also needs further attention. Currently, the caste order is presented in the graded hierarchical system with one’s occupation determining one’s caste. This map, however, is an incomplete and unjust description of the caste system. Along with the description of jobs, the demographic representation of each caste group needs to be done in comparison to the ratio of the population and its representation in positions of power. This snapshot would give a clearer picture of the outside and inside world of the caste system and its actualized form in operation. It will also expose to the world how banal and pathological this ecology of caste is.

The caste disorder is a product of what Nietzsche calls ‘priestly aristocracy’,90 a ‘priestly caste’ that values the retention of purity.91 It is the super-dominance of the priestly class over the common affairs of civic society. With the ascendancy of the priestly aristocracy, ‘antithetical values’ become ‘deepened, sharpened, and internalized’.92 It is an unhealthy recourse from the beginning, wherein ‘mankind is ill to the effects of priestly naïveté’.

Difference in caste society is presented as a consequence of merit and demerit. A person who is different, that is, different from the Brahminical social and cultural order, most often belonging to a non-Brahmin caste, is first made to feel different. This difference is a callous form of declaring the inability of the Other. Thus, the differentiated being lives within a mendacious propaganda. The differences are first forced upon the person as a forewarning about the unequal relationships at play. The unequal terms of a relationship are ways to channel the oppressor group’s insecurities to enforce a destabilizing inferiority upon the Other. The Other, having no adequate space or voice to air grievances, is forced to fall in line with the standards of the oppressive Brahminical order.

Casteism is the longest-thriving pathology known to mankind. Conjuring differences between human beings out of thin air and claiming they are based on birth, and then ascribing them a certain social status, is a testament to seriously compromised mental and social health. A child is taught to be different from others. The question of one’s differences is emphasized so strongly that the child follows it without necessarily making critical inquiries. The child is mentored by the entire family to harbour the feeling of otherness towards Others who are most likely inferior or lower in the socio-economic ladder. The prejudicial attitudes that a child is brought up with prepares it to be harmful towards Others, natural innocence ruthlessly taken away by the oppressive minds in the family. Later, as time passes, when the child becomes an adult, he or she is told—misleadingly—by society that differences don’t exist. Therefore, the adult is now in a dilemma: how to now believe that everyone is equal irrespective of the differences? However, the same adult seldom questions or challenges these foolish differentiations and changing narratives—how the Other is different and not supposed to be mingled with, and is yet ‘equal’. The Other that the child was never allowed to play with is now deemed his equal. This leads to bewilderment at the Other receiving state benefits. This is how caste numbs one’s consciousness—it is true for both the oppressor and the oppressed.

The source of power that Shudras and other caste groups derive is from the organized power of religion. The Brahmins’ control of the religious order that grants downward contempt towards the lower castes is primarily responsible for the Dalit condition. Shudras act within the religious context. Anything beyond the Brahminical zone does not offer the same power play. For example, a Kshatriya does not hold power as an upper-caste person beyond the religious domain. If a Kshatriya migrates out of the religion, s/he will be exposed to the equality that exists outside it. He will be a person devoid of caste standards, that is, an equal human being and no longer an upper-caste person. Similarly, people in the ‘upper’-caste column have gained this status by being within the order of Brahminical Hindu religion. Thus, the source of religion brings with it unquestioned power and influence. This is then used against the ‘lower’-caste folks who do not have an escape from this violence because they are also conditioned to the caste order. This system of caste is maintained by the Brahmins who occupy the highest place in the order. Their position is unquestioned and remains unchallenged. Their control over the spiritual realm is the first and last reason for the existence of the caste order. Brahmins can, in fact, use their influence to condemn caste-ordained violence. They can also issue warrants against other ‘upper’-caste touchable groups who are waging violence against the Dalits. T...

Caste rebellion is anticipated and expected only from Shudra and Untouchable caste groups. The anti-caste Brahminic vision is absent from the imagination of Brahmins and other dominant castes. Many Brahmins remain subjects of such a system without realizing their participation in perpetuating it, possibly losing the support of relatives.

In India, however, dormitories remain segregated along caste lines and personal choices like food and sexuality is heavily policed. Dorms become a space to promote hatred, humiliation and fear to Dalit students instead of becoming a collaborative space of diverse ideas confronting the caste problem. One hardly notices dominant-caste students advocating for social change and becoming the banner holder of the annihilation of caste movement. Sensitization of Dalit lives and problems relating to caste is not in the purview of the university administration and neither in the student groups. A Dalit student lives life in isolation without him/her being acknowledged and appreciated let alone supported by the dominant-caste students on campus.

comradeship is a bond of trust that is developed through personal, social and economic sacrifices. The struggle then becomes a common cause and not the Other’s cause.