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'