What it Means to be a Brahmin Dalit | Economic and Political Weekly

What it Means to be a Brahmin Dalit | Economic and Political Weekly:

What it Means to be a Brahmin Dalit

Vol - XLVII No. 52, December 29, 2012 | Anjali Rajoria

• Web Exclusives

An impassioned plea by a Dalit woman professional for acknowledging the prejudices and obstacles even "privileged" people like her face when confronted with the structure of caste. This personal experience underlines the context for the Constitutional amendment bill on allow reservations for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotions.

 Anjali Rajoria is a medical doctor from Delhi.

"A slave cannot be freed save he free himself. Neither can you enslave a free man, the most you can do is kill him."

- Robert A. Heinlein

In case you are wondering what a 'Brahmin Dalit' means, let me clarify at the very outset, I claim to be a Brahmin Dalit because I was born with the label "lower caste". (In fact that label is given even before one is born, but lets keep that aside for a while.) However, today I am a relatively well off, educated and an accomplished dalit, hence the epithet, 'Brahmin Dalit'.  Do you think that I am trying to gain your sympathy by deliberately posing as a victim of the evil caste system despite being in a much better position than the majority of my fellow dalit brethren?

The answer is a clear, unequivocal No! My purpose here is only to help people understand what it really means to be a dalit and how it is so difficult for us to get rid of our caste identity, even in this time and age. I writhe in agony as I give myself the title of 'Brahmin Dalit'. When I realised that it is my religion that is impelling me to live life with a degraded status forever, I decided to renounced my religion. I am no longer a Hindu. When I look back, I feel so proud of having taken that decision a few years back.

But the stark reality is, even if a dalit turns into a non-Hindu in her quest for liberation, her caste status continues to haunt her. Her identity continues to be shaped by her caste and she continues to grapple with it every single day. Her society forces her to bear the burden of bondage. It is this bondage that we wish to break. We wish to be freed from slavery.

Perhaps the title 'Brahmin Dalit' is not appropriate. Because a dalit Hindu can convert to Islam, Christianity or to Buddhism, but she can never turn into a Brahmin. "Dalit" rigid label for life. It refuses to erode. It is a label that reminds us constantly of who we are. We stand at the end of centuries of injustice and oppression. And even today we are treated as second class humans. We are presumed to be unequal in possibly all aspects - less intelligent, less capable, less hygienic, less civilised and what not. The inequality meted out to us is justified on these counts.

So even if a dalit accomplishes something in his life, he is secretly dismissed as an exception. He is not granted his place of respect. Very few people realise how much he would have struggled to achieve what he has. Very few people take the pain to empathise with him. Yet, publicly his example is used to criticise the positive discrimination extended by the government to the dalits. It is not uncommon to see such hypocritical attitude of casteists around.

True, urbanisation and modernisation have diluted the occupational rigidities and economic disabilities to some extent. Dalits can now aspire to occupy the highest echelons in terms of occupational status. But does that mean that we have got rid of this hydra-headed monster of caste? Definitely not. For those who are still wondering in disbelief, my suggestion would be to take a closer look at the whole picture. If you think that caste no longer holds relevance in urban India, go and personally talk to any of the backward category students studying in any of the elite institutions of this country. Ask her how many times she has been disgraced by her teachers and fellow students. Ask her how many times she has been forced to hide her identity from her professors for fear of being castigated only because she is a dalit. Ask her how painful and tormenting it is for her to live under the shadow of untouchability in a free country.

Thorat Committee Report clearly points towards the continued discrimination and segregation of students belonging to dalit and tribal communities in premier institutions of this country like All India Institute of Medical Sciences and Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. For how long will we turn a Nelson’s eye towards the plight and anguish of these young and bright minds? How many more Eklavya-like sacrifices do we need to get rid of Dronacharyas who deliberately fail even deserving students belonging to backward communities.

It does not need rocket science to grasp the reality that caste stigmatisation exists even today, a fact that no well-reasoned person can brush off. A look at the website of National Commission for Scheduled Castes and National Commission for Scheduled Tribes would easily give you an insight into the horrendous levels of continuing maltreatment dalits are being subjected to. It probably would require an encyclopedia-sized tomb to mention all the atrocities that have been perpetrated and continue to be perpetrated in the name of caste.

Let the dead past bury the dead. We do not hold grievances against injustices of the past because what has happened cannot be undone. But even in the present times, 90% of the so called menial jobs are performed by dalits. Those living in the hinterland are forced to reside in ghettos or slums. Government schools and offices continue to witness segregation of dalits. The occupation of priesthood is still monopolised by Brahmins. We still have Hindu temples that continue to deny entry to dalits. Inter-caste marriages are the exception rather than the norm. Honour killings of those who dare to defy the diktats of their elders by marrying people of “lower castes” are commonplace. In fact, caste is such a pervasive reality that almost no group of people (including non-Hindus and even non-resident Indians) and no part of India is untouched by its immense influence.

I have nothing against the Brahmins. Being born to the upper caste (or lower caste) is not a matter of choice. I hate the Brahminical system, not Brahmins. Vices of the Brahminical system may be found in dalits and non-dalits alike. The ultimate panacea for all such ills has to be ‘Annihilation of the Caste System’. Its time for us to come out of our comfort zones, accept the harsh realities and collectively try to heal the near-permanent wounds of dalits. It is time for us to open our hearts and minds to embrace those as equals who have been disgraced and denied a dignified life for far too long.

I am very hopeful that a time will come when caste will lose its raison d'etre, when people will be treated only as humans and when we will redefine our identity in terms of secular credentials alone. Babasaheb Ambedkar had once remarked, “We are all Indians, firstly and lastly.” To realise this dream, we must ensure that caste is stripped off of all the functions that it performs for Indian society. We must take collective action to dismantle this evil structure. There are many well-intentioned people who are sincere about the goal of eradication of caste hierarchy. It is these people who continue to give us hope – hope of ushering in a new era – a caste-less and classless society.

Numerous measures can be taken to efface bigoted caste identities, at governmental and societal levels. Strict enforcement of legal provisions to proscribe all forms of expressions, rituals and social practices associated with the caste system is the need of the hour. Alongside these steps, we also need to ban the use of caste names to prevent targeting of caste groups and instead replace surnames with the names of either the father or the mother. (Former union health minister Ambudani Ramadoss had given a worthwhile suggestion in this regard). Inter–caste marriages should be freely promoted and incentives should be provided for those who decide to inter-marry. Government and social agencies should make inroads into dalit areas to provide equal and universal access to education, social equality and employment to all. Upper-caste-dominated occupations, especially in the private sector and media need to be accessible to people from the backward sections. Most importantly, we need to infuse the spirit of confidence and self-worth in our dalit brethren.

Martin Luther King Jr. had famously observed, “A person who cannot die for a cause is not fit to live.” To my dalit brothers and sisters, this is my message: We are not alone in our fight against tyranny. There are many others outside our net who empathise with us. But we have to be the prime movers and torchbearers in our struggle. We are ‘chosen’ to fight and we will keep fighting. This is our only option.

Brothers and sisters, it is time for a revolution. A revolution that will begin in our hearts and minds. Liberation of the self from internalised oppression does not happen quickly or easily. The tiniest bit of self-liberation needs to be nourished and treasured and consciously grown. We have come very far, but there is still a long way to go. We will shape a better tomorrow and we will leave behind footprints for others to follow.

'via Blog this'

The question of casteism still remains - The Hindu

The question of casteism still remains - The Hindu:

The question of casteism still remains

Vonage® Exclusive Offer - Get Our Best Offer - Only $9.99/Mo for First 6 Months - Sign Up Now!vonage.com

Ads by Google

K. SATYANARAYANA

SHARE  ·   COMMENT (32)   ·   PRINT   ·   T+  

TOPICS

social issue

minority group

social issues (general)

social issue

Contrary to what Nandy’s defenders would have us believe, his corruption remark reinforces negative stereotypes about Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

The controversy around Ashis Nandy’s casual remarks at the Jaipur Literature Festival did not address a number of important questions of public concern. The frenzied ‘Save Nandy’ campaign that followed has actually foreclosed any productive discussion. His supporters have been trying to explain and contextualise Professor Nandy’s flippant remarks through references to his scholarship and eminent status.

Sankaran Krishna seeks to locate Mr. Nandy’s words in the wake of his earlier scholarship and criticisms (The Hindu, January 31). Such an approach is irrelevant to what Mr. Nandy said at the JLF. Harsh Sethi (The Hindu, January 28), Yogendra Yadav (Indian Express, January 28), Lawrence Liang (Economic Times, January 30) and several others have argued that Mr. Nandy’s statements should not be read as casteist. What is pertinent is that both Mr. Nandy and his defenders invoke ‘SC, ST and OBCs’ in a manner that reinforces a stereotypical image of these communities as “intolerant” and “undemocratic.” Shiv Visvanathan writes, “Dalits and OBCs are treated as sacred cows” (Firspost, Jan. 28).

One-sided

The other standard mode of response has been to combine the banning of Kamal Haasan’s film Vishwaroopam, the Rushdie affair and other state censorship issues with Mr. Nandy’s “freedom of speech” to conclude that Indian society is becoming intolerant and undemocratic. Manu Joseph writes in the New York Times ( Jan. 30) that India is “a paradise for those who take offence.” That Mr. Nandy named the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward Classes, a large population of the marginalised protected by special laws, as the most corrupt, is totally ignored.

There has been absolutely no attempt to seriously examine the significance of the SC/ST Act and its provisions given that we live in a society with rampant caste discrimination. Madhu Kishwar tweeted on January 28: “Wonder why no one discussing the draconian provisions in SC/ST Act under which Ashis Nandy being booked. Only focusing on Nandy, not the law.” It was no less than a call for the scrapping of this important 1989 Act, which was a result of decades of lobbying by the Dalit movement. Its repeal has been, for long, the demand of the Shiv Sena, the Pattali Makkal Katchi, the Samajawadi Party and such like. Swapan Dasgupta echoes this view saying the Act is “absurd, inflexible, draconian” (The Pioneer, Feb. 3). Antara Dev Sen says that “the more socially disadvantaged you are as an identity group, the more laws you may have at your disposal to attack” (Asian Age, Feb. 2). Liang argues that filing a case is “a lumpen strategy of the right” that all minorities have adopted.

Even if it is not the only option, is it so wrong for Dalits to file a case? No one thought it necessary to examine the validity of Mr. Nandy’s “provocative” claims. The irony is that in the name of freedom of expression, liberal and rightwing intellectuals have come together in actually suppressing all debate on Mr. Nandy’s objectionable comment that the OBC, SC and ST people are “the most corrupt.”

The effect has been to deflect all attention from his bizarre statements (dubbed as “nuanced utterances”). The question of whether Mr. Nandy’s remarks in fact constitute casteist speech was never given serious attention. Mr. Nandy himself clarified his position many times but never unconditionally withdrew his comments. He reiterated the view that the SC, ST and OBCs are indeed most corrupt (in the sense of they forming a majority of the population) in very clear terms on an NDTV show ( Jan. 28 interview to Barkha Dutt).

In the case of the socially stigmatised and marginalised people, references of any broad-brush kind only reinforce stereotypes of these people. Imagine a white intellectual in the United States, irrespective of the nature and stature of his previous body of work, saying that Blacks and Hispanics in the U.S. are the most corrupt. What would be the repercussions?

What is more, by a clever displacement it was argued that Mr. Nandy actually was the victim of an intolerant culture and authoritarian politics. He is seen as ‘hounded’ and ‘harassed’. It has been argued that the response to Mr. Nandy is ‘intolerant outrage’ and ‘competitive outrage’. From whom? Clearly, the Dalit-Bahujans. When Shuddhabrata Sengupta (Kafila.org, January 30) wickedly refers to “the foot soldiers of identity politics” and “brokers of victimhood,” he is referring not just to one or two individuals, but tarnishing entire communities. These are sweeping statements that depict the SCs, STs, OBCs as people who have no ‘commitment’ to careful listening, who, unlike the ‘upper castes,’ are easily offended, crave for false publicity and organise stage-managed protests.

An editorial in The Hindu (“From Footnote to FIR,” Jan. 30) notes that “in a country where there is a flourishing outrage industry — helped by a slew of laws that takes the feelings of easily offended individuals very seriously — there is a great deal of publicity and even political capital to be acquired in claiming that sentiments are hurt.” The rhetorical strategy is to refer to Indians in general but the specific context is the protest by certain SC, ST and OBC groups. The running theme of the Nandy defence team is that the public (especially the marginalised) has neither skills of reasoning nor a sense of humour to appreciate Mr. Nandy’s words in context. In fact, the campaign to produce Mr. Nandy as a victim as well as a great man constructs SC, ST and OBCs as fools and criminals.

‘Lumpen strategy’

Mr. Nandy’s defenders may have the right to be delusional and believe that his comments are pro-Dalit, pro-Adivasi and pro-OBC, and that such comments should not therefore attract the SC/ST Act. But to call taking recourse to a legal remedy ‘a lumpen strategy’ and to term the SC/ST Act ‘draconian’ — as some have done — is to casually undermine what is in fact an extremely important legislation. This is a special law designed to protect the dignity, life and property of the SC/ST people.

The dispute between the SC/STs and Ashis Nandy is one about dignity and respect. The state is not directly in the picture. A section of the marginalised, and the National Commission for the Scheduled Castes, invoked the SC/ST Act. Many others have objected to Mr. Nandy’s views on other grounds. But how does asking for the application of a special law amount to censorship and violation of freedom of expression? True, this Act imposes limits on speech that humiliates and discriminates against the Dalits and Adivasis. The new scholarship on humiliation and caste, by the likes of Gopal Guru, elaborates on and illustrates this point.

Mr. Nandy first clarified that the view that the SC, ST and OBCs are the most corrupt is a normative view, and not an empirical one. Despite this, he later claimed on NDTV that ticketless travellers in trains and black-ticket sellers in cinema halls would inevitably be SC, ST, and OBC, and they are in a majority.

Not pro-Dalit

This theory of false agency and emulation of the upper castes (in matters of corruption) is highly objectionable and offensive and it cannot be passed off as a ‘pro-Dalit’ statement. Madhu Koda, for all his skills at corruption, is not the role model of the marginalised. The corruption of some of the elite among the disadvantaged is as dangerous and oppressive as that of the upper caste elites. In fact, Mr. Nandy’s theory reinforces the commonsensical view of the oppressed castes as corrupt. The assumption that only physical violence and atrocities attract the SC/ST Act is wrong. Any generalisation that produces a stereotype could be objected to both on moral and legal grounds. There are divergent views among SC, ST, and OBC commentators on how to deal with Mr. Nandy’s remarks and theory of corruption (such loose talk is turned into a theory). But no one claimed that Mr. Nandy’s speech is excellent and ironic. No Dalits have come out to support him.

The public intellectual, Chandra Bhan Prasad, asked Dalits to forgive Mr. Nandy hoping he would unconditionally withdraw his statements. Some activists and politicians filed cases under the SC/ST Act. What is wrong with this? How can anyone take objection to one’s right to seek legal remedy under an Act that provides minimum protection to the deprived in this country? How can anyone prescribe only ‘a verbal or intellectual redress’ for these offensive and derogatory remarks?

In this vitiated context, one can only take some solace in the words of the Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir, which said on February 1: “He [Nandy] can’t continue making statements like this. Whatever may be your intent, you can’t go on making statements.” When staying his arrest, the bench noted, “We are not at all happy”. Nor are SCs, STs and OBCs.

(The author teaches at the English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad, and is the author of No Alphabet in Sight: New Dalit Writing from South India)

Keywords: SC/ST Act, pro-Dalit statement, Asish Nandy comments, Jaipur Literature Festival, Shuddhabrata Sengupta, National Commission

'via Blog this'

Table honour killings bill this session: Karat

Table honour killings bill this session: Karat

WHY I KILLED GANDHI - Nathuram Godse

Gandhiji Assassin Nathuram Godse's Final Address to the Court
Nathuram Godse was arrested immediately after he assassinated Gandhiji, based on a F. I. R. filed by Nandlal Mehta at the Tughlak Road Police station at Delhi. The trial, which was held in camera, began on 27th May 1948 and concluded on 10th February 1949. He was sentenced to death. An appeal to the Punjab High Court, then in session at Simla, did not find favour and the sentence was upheld.
The statement that you are about to read is the last made by Godse before the Court on the 5th of May 1949. Such was the power and eloquence of this statement that one of the judges, G.. D. Khosla, later wrote, "I have, however, no doudt that had the audience of that day been constituted into a jury and entrusted with the task of deciding Godse's appeal, they would have brought a verdict of 'not Guilty' by an overwhelming majority"

WHY I KILLED GANDHI
Born in a devotional Brahmin family, I instinctively came to revere Hindu religion, Hindu history and Hindu culture. I had, therefore, been intensely proud of Hinduism as a whole. As I grew up I developed a tendency to free thinking unfettered by any superstitious allegiance to any isms, political or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I openly joined anti-caste movements and maintained that all Hindus were of equal status as to rights, social and religious and should be considered high or low on merit alone and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or profession. I used publicly to take part in organized anti-caste dinners in which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Chamars and Bhangis participated. We broke the caste rules and dined in the company of each other. I have read the speeches and writings of Dadabhai Naoroji, Vivekanand, Gokhale, Tilak, along with the books of ancient and modern history of India and some prominent countries like England , France , America and Russia . Moreover I studied the tenets of Socialism and Marxism. But above all I studied very closely whatever Veer Savarkar and Gandhiji had written and spoken, as to my mind these two ideologies have contributed more to the moulding of the thought and action of the Indian people during the last thirty years or so, than any other single factor has done.
All this reading and thinking led me to believe it was my first duty to serve Hindudom and Hindus both as a patriot and as a world citizen. To secure the freedom and to safeguard the just interests of some thirty crores (300 million) of Hindus would automatically constitute the freedom and the well-being of all India , one fifth of human race. This conviction led me naturally to devote myself to the Hindu Sanghtanist ideology and programme, which alone, I came to believe, could win and preserve the national independence of Hindustan, my Motherland, and enable her to render true service to humanity as well.
Since the year 1920, that is, after the demise of Lokamanya Tilak, Gandhiji's influence in the Congress first increased and then became supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogan of truth and non-violence which he paraded ostentatiously before the country. No sensible or enlightened person could object to those slogans. In fact there is nothing new or original in them. They are implicit in every constitutional public movement. But it is nothing but a mere dream if you imagine that the bulk of mankind is, or can ever become, capable of scrupulous adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life from day to day.
In fact, honour, duty and love of one's own kith and kin and country might often compel us to disregard non-violence and to use force. I could never conceive that an armed resistance to an aggression is unjust. I would consider it a religious and moral duty to resist and, if possible, to overpower such an enemy by use of force. [In the Ramayana] Rama killed Ravana in a tumultuous fight and relieved Sita.. [In the Mahabharata], Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness; and Arjuna had to fight and slay quite a number of his friends and relations including the revered Bhishma because the latter was on the side of the aggressor. It is my firm
belief that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty of violence, the Mahatma betrayed a total ignorance of the springs of human action. In more recent history, it was the heroic fight put up by Chhatrapati Shivaji that first checked and eventually destroyed the Muslim tyranny in India . It was absolutely essentially for Shivaji to overpower and kill an aggressive Afzal Khan, failing which he would have lost his own life. In condemning history's towering warriors like Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Gobind Singh as misguided patriots, Gandhiji has merely exposed his self-conceit. He was, paradoxical as it may appear, a violent pacifist who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and non-violence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen for ever for the freedom they
brought to them.
The accumulating provocation of thirty-two years, culminating in his last pro-Muslim fast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence of Gandhi should be brought to an end immediately. Gandhi had done very good in South Africa to uphold the rights and well-being of the Indian community there. But when he finally returned to India he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of what was right or wrong. If the country wanted his leadership, it had to accept his infallibility; if it did not, he would stand aloof from the Congress and carry on his own way. Against such an attitude there can be no halfway house. Either Congress had to surrender its will to his and had to be content with playing second fiddle to all his eccentricity, whimsicality, metaphysics and primitive vision, or it had to carry on without him. He alone was the Judge of everyone and every thing; he was the master brain guiding the civil disobedience movement; no other could know the technique of that movement. He alone knew when to begin and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, it might bring untold disaster and political reverses but that could make no difference to the Mahatma's infallibility. 'A Satyagrahi can never fail' was his formula for declaring his own infallibility and nobody except himself knew what a Satyagrahi is. Thus, the Mahatma became the judge and jury in his own cause. These childish insanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe austerity of life, ceaseless work and lofty character made Gandhi formidable and irresistible. Many people thought that his politics were irrational but they had either to withdraw from the Congress or place their intelligence at his feet to do with as he liked. In a position of such absolute irresponsibility Gandhi was guilty of blunder after blunder, failure after failure, disaster after disaster. Gandhi's pro-Muslim policy is blatantly in his perverse attitude on the question of the national language of India . It is quite obvious that Hindi has the most prior claim to be accepted as the premier language. In the beginning of his career in India , Gandhi gave a great impetus to Hindi but as he found that the Muslims did not like it, he became a champion of what is called Hindustani.. Everybody in India knows that there is no language called Hindustani; it has no grammar; it has no vocabulary. It is a mere dialect, it is spoken, but not written. It is a bastard tongue and cross-breed between Hindi and Urdu, and not even the Mahatma's sophistry could make it popular. But in his desire to please the Muslims he insisted that Hindustani alone should be the national language of India . His blind followers, of course, supported him and the so-called hybrid language began to be used..
The charm and purity of the Hindi language was to be prostituted to please the Muslims. All his experiments were at the expense of the Hindus. From August 1946 onwards the private armies of the Muslim League began a massacre of the Hindus. The then Viceroy, Lord Wavell, though distressed at what was happening, would not use his powers under the Government of India Act of 1935 to prevent the rape, murder and arson. The Hindu blood began to flow from Bengal to Karachi with some retaliation by the Hindus. The Interim Government formed in September was sabotaged by its Muslim League members right from its inception, but the more they became disloyal and treasonable to the government of which they were a part, the greater was Gandhi's infatuation for them. Lord Wavell had to resign as he could not bring about a settlement and he was succeeded by Lord Mountbatten. King Log was followed by King Stork. The Congress which had boasted of its nationalism and socialism secretly accepted Pakistan literally at the point of the bayonet and abjectly surrendered to Jinnah. India was vivisected and one-third of the Indian territory became foreign land to us from August 15, 1947.
Lord Mountbatten came to be described in Congress circles as the greatest Viceroy and Governor-General this country ever had. The official date for handing over power was fixed for June 30, 1948, but Mountbatten with his ruthless surgery gave us a gift of vivisected India ten months in advance. This is what Gandhi had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what Congress party calls 'freedom' and 'peaceful transfer of power'. The Hindu-Muslim unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic state was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called 'freedom won by them with sacrifice' - whose sacrifice? When top leaders of Congress, with the consent of Gandhi, divided and tore the country - which we consider a deity of worship - my mind was filled with direful anger.
One of the conditions imposed by Gandhi for his breaking of the fast unto death related to the mosques in Delhi occupied by the Hindu refugees. But when Hindus in Pakistan were subjected to violent attacks he did not so much as utter a single word to protest and censure the Pakistan Government or the Muslims concerned. Gandhi was shrewd enough to know that while undertaking a fast unto death, had he imposed for its break some condition on the Muslims in Pakistan , there would have been found hardly any Muslims who could have shown some grief if the fast had ended in his death. It was for this reason that he purposely avoided imposing any condition on the Muslims. He was fully aware of from the experience that Jinnah was not at all perturbed or influenced by his fast and the Muslim League hardly attached any value to the inner voice of Gandhi. Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he had failed his paternal duty inasmuch as he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power and his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled before Jinnah's iron will and proved to be powerless. Briefly speaking, I thought to myself and foresaw I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred and that I shall have lost all my honour, even more valuable than my life, if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time I felt that the Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and would be powerful with armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan . People may even call me and dub me as devoid of any sense or foolish, but the nation would be free to follow the course founded on the reason which I consider to be necessary for sound nation-building. After having fully considered the question, I took the final decision in the matter, but I did not speak about it to anyone whatsoever. I took courage in both my hands and I did fire the shots at Gandhiji on 30th January 1948, on the prayer-grounds of Birla House. I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus. There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book and for this reason I fired those fatal shots. I bear no ill will towards anyone individually but I do say that I had no respect for the present government owing to their policy which was unfairly favourable towards the Muslims. But at the same time I could clearly see that the policy was entirely due to the presence of Gandhi.
I have to say with great regret that Prime Minister Nehru quite forgets that his preachings and deeds are at times at variances with each other when he talks about India as a secular state in season and out of season, because it is significant to note that Nehru has played a leading role in the establishment of the theocratic state of Pakistan, and his job was made easier by Gandhi's persistent policy of appeasement towards the Muslims. I now stand before the court to accept the full share of my responsibility for what I have done and the judge would, of course, pass against me such orders of sentence as may be considered proper. But I would like to add that I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me, nor do I wish that anyone else should beg for mercy on my behalf. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled against it on all sides. I have no doubt that honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof some day in future.

A Dalit convert speaks - Annonymous

A Dalit convert speaks………..

When I was hungry, you fed me,

When I was naked, you clothed me,

When I was broken, you held me,

When I was neglected, when I was beaten, when I was injured, when I was tired, when I was ashamed, when I didn’t believe in myself,

Truly brother, when you held my hand then, you held God’s hand !

Brother, let me ask you,

Why was I hungry in the first place?

Was it because there was famine in my land?

Why was I naked?

Was it because I did not deserve the dignity of clothes?

Brother, why did no one touch me?

Can a million bathings make me worthy of being touched

By those who deride you now?

When I was weak and helpless

No revolution was fought on my behalf Brother

Now that I feel stronger, wars are being waged to help me become weak again

I do not understand………

Sister, can YOU help me understand?

When was I ever so important?

Why is it important that I be weak?

Does it make someone else stronger?

What kind of strength is that?

The strength of another’s weakness……….

Tell me Sister, why do you get beaten on my behalf?

Why don’t you leave me alone?

Let me rot in filth, let my women become slaves of some master they do not choose,

Let my children choke with the shame of being borne from one such as me

Let my masters beat me, kick me, stone me, strip me

Brother, if you take me away,

What will my poor master do?

Who will clean his dirt and his garbage?

Who will gather the dust from his shoe?

Who will hide when he arrives?

Who will cry every night like my ancestors did?

Brother you are no saint

But you are no sinner either

You don’t deserve to be beaten for me

Please understand Brother

For if you feed me, my master knows I grow strong

If you clothe me, I will learn to stand up before my master

I will be free……………

Do you not understand, Brother and Sister?

If I am free,

To my master, I AM USELESS !

KalingaTimes.com : Sudarsan recreates sand chariots of Balaram Das

KalingaTimes.com : Sudarsan recreates sand chariots of Balaram Das

KalingaTimes Correspondent
Puri (Orissa): When lakhs of people will converge here to witness the famous annual Rath Yatra of Lord Jagannath on Monday, they will also get a chance to see the sand sculptures of the chariots of the deities on the sandy beaches of this seaside city of Orissa.



In an attempt to recreate the sand chariots of Lord Jagannath, Lord Balabhadra and Devi Subhadra that the 14th Century poet Balaram Das created to worship the deities, sand artist Sudarsan Pattnaik has carved three colourful chariots on sand.

As the legend goes, author of Dandi Ramayan Balaram Das had gone to the Puri beach at Banki Muhana to create the chariots of the deities and worshipped them there after he was prevented from participating in the Rath Yatra of Lord Jagannath for not being a Brahmin. Lord Jagannath had heard the prayers of the poet and arrived on the beach to bless him.

Sudarsan and the students of his Golden Sand Art Institute took 12 hours to create the sand images of the three chariots - Nandighosha, Taladhwaja and Debadalana - by using 20 tonnes of sand on Saturday.

Sudarsan, who describes Balaram Das as the father of sand sculpture in the world, said that the aim behind creating the sand chariots was to remember the poet and highlight the message attached to the Balaram Das episode that people belonging to all castes were equal before Lord Jagannath.

Sudarsan has so far participated in more than 34 international sand sculpture championships across the world and won many awards for the country.

The three chariots created by Sudarsan and his students are attracting a large number of devotees thronging the beach.

US House of Representatives Passes Resolution on Untouchability in India

1. US House of Representatives Passes Resolution on Untouchability in India


WASHINGTON, D.C., July 27, 2007: The United States House of Representatives passed a resolution on Untouchability in India. A resolution is a statement of the House which is agreed to by a voice vote of those present. It is not a law, and carries no legal implications. Resolutions can, however, influence government policy. The full text follows:

House Concurrent Resolution 139: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should address the ongoing problem of unt ouchability in India.

Sponsored by: Mr. FRANKS of Arizona (for himself, Ms. KILPATRICK, Ms. NORTON, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, Mr. AKIN, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. SALI, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. RUSH, Mr. KUCINICH, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, and Ms. CLARKE) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Whereas the United States and the Republic of India have entered an unprecedented partnership;

Whereas, the July 18, 2005, Joint Statement between President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stated that, '[a]s leaders of nations committed to the values of human freedom, democracy, and rule of law , the new relationship between India and the United States will promote stability, democracy, prosperity, and peace throughout the world [. . . and] it will enhance our ability to work together to provide global leadership in areas of mutual concern and interest';

Whereas caste is the socioeconomic stratification of people in South Asia based on a combination of work and descent;

Whereas the 'Untouchables', now known as the Dalits, and the forest tribe s of India, called Tribals, who together number approximately 250,000,000 to 300,000,000 people, are the primary victims of caste discrimination in India;

Whereas discrimination against the Dalits and Tribals has existed for more than 2,000 years and has included educational discrimination, economic disenfranchisement, physical abuse, discrimination in medical care, religious discrimination, and violence targeting Dalit and Tribal women;

Whereas Article 17 of the Constitution of India outlaws untouchability;

Whereas despite numerous laws enacted for the protection and betterment of the Dalits and Tribals, they are still considered outcasts in Indian society and are treated as such;

Whereas the Dalits and Tribals are denied equal treatment under the law;

Whereas the National Commission on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has declared that many of the reported cases of atrocities against Dalits and Tribals end in acqu ittals;

Whereas Dalit women are often raped with impunity;

Whereas despite the fact that many Dalits do not report crimes for fear of reprisals by the dominant castes, official police statistics averaged over the past five years show that 13 Dalits are murdered every week, five Dalits' homes or possessions are burnt every week, six Dalits are kidnapped or abducted every week, three Dalit women are raped every day, 11 Dalits are beaten every day, and a crime is committed against a Dali t every 18 minutes;

Whereas the majority of temple prostitutes as well as the majority of women trafficked in India are Dalit women;

Whereas low-caste unborn females are targeted for abortions;

Whereas most Dalits and Tribals are among those poorest of the poor living on less than $1 per day;

Whereas most of India's bonded laborers are Dalits;

Whereas half of India's Dalit children are undernourished, 21 percent are 'se verely underweight', and 12 percent die before their 5th birthday;

Whereas Dalits and other low-caste people are denied equal access to education;

Whereas the Dalits and Tribals maintain higher illiteracy rates than non-Dalit populations;

Whereas the public education afforded Dalits and Tribals, when available at all, is usually inadequate and conducted in regional languages or Hindi, thereby disqualifying them from access to India's public universities which teach in Engli sh, and from most government positions and most advanced jobs in India, which require English;

Whereas the HIV/AIDS epidemic in India is massive and underreported;

Whereas the United Nations estimates that approximately 50,000,000 Indians will die from HIV/AIDS in the next 40 years; and

Whereas Dalits and Tribals are disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS and are the largest high-risk population in India: Now, therefore, be it

R esolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, as the leaders of the United States and the Republic of India have expressed commitment to the values of human freedom, democracy, and the rule of law, it is in the interests of the United States to address the problem of the treatment of the Dalits and Tribals in India in order to better meet mutual economic and security goals by--

(1) raising the issues of caste discrimination, violence aga inst women, and untouchability through diplomatic channels both directly with the Government of India and within the context of international bodies;

(2) inviting Dalit organizations to participate in the planning and implementation of development projects from the United States Agency for International Development and other United States development organizations;

(3) prioritizing funding for projects that positively impact Dalit and Tribal communit ies, especially Dalit women;

(4) ensuring that cooperative research programs targeting rural health care, the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and rural technology contain proper focus on the Dalits and Tribals;

(5) ensuring that anyone receiving funding in India from the United States Government--

(A) is aware that it is United States Government policy that caste discrimination is unacceptable, and that the United States is committed to eliminating it; and

(B) treat all p eople equally, with regard to caste discrimination;

(6) ensuring that--

(A) qualified Dalits are in no way discouraged from working with the United States Government or organizations receiving funding in India from the United States Government, and that transparent and fair recruitment, selection, and career development processes are implemented, with clear objective criteria; and

(B) procedures exist to detect and remedy any caste discri mination in employment conditions, wages, benefits or job security for anyone working with the United States Government or organizations receiving funding in India from the United States Government;

(7) encouraging United States citizens working in India to avoid discrimination toward the Dalits in all business interactions; and

(8) discussing the issue of caste in the context of congressional delegations.