05-14-2005, 09:18 PM
OP-Ed from Pioneer - interesting article.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Â <b>Is this the Empire's revenge? </b>
Chandrabhan Prasad
Now himself under cloud for having made a casteist remark against Anil Kumar Yadav, the then SP of Gopal Ganj, the controversial IAS officer, Mr LV Saptarishi, has unintentionally triggered off a new debate. Do senior officers make casteist remarks at the work place? Or, do traditional upper caste people make casteist remarks against people of the lower castes? What in this case seems certain is that, either the two Election Commissioners in question had actually made the remark as being alleged Mr Saptarishi, or Saptarishi himself had made that remark against the SP of Gopalganj, and knew that such remarks can be made, and somebody else implicated of casteist tendencies on grounds such as this.
Given the timing of Saptarishi's "disclosure", and the way he did it - holding a press conference like a politician - he has, in all likelihood, worked in tandem with the RJD to market Lalu's "victimhood". Whatever be the circumstances, and intent of Saptarishi, the issue raised by him needs further attention. In yet another case, Mr VP Shetty, chairman of the Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI), has been accused of making a casteist remark against Dalits. He was arrested and released on bail.
Mr Shetty, Mr Saptarishi, or the two Election Commissioners, are no ordinary citizens as they hold high positions. To many, there is an element of doubt as to how can people like them could make casteist remarks. To the victims, however, casteist remarks may be a reality. A casteist remark, or remarks meant to humiliate an individual on the basis of his/her social origin, may occur in various forms. A person with a higher level of sophistication may be quite subtle while somebody less bright may be quite brutal. But the hurt caused may be of the same level.
India is caste-society, built by bricks of bias and prejudice. Castes all over India have "caste-jokes" meant to denigrate others. "Teen tagava par biswas mat karna": In English this means: "Never believe men of triple threads (Brahman, Kshatriya, and Vaishya)". Another one goes: "Sath saala hai". In English, this roughly translates as "he is sixty years of age" (hence a Yadav), and entitled to wisdom. Now sample this: "Padha likha jat, solah doona ath" which says "to an educated Jat, sixteen multiplied by two is equivalent to eight".
Since the Yadavas have traditionally been perceived as a violent people, even a fair electoral victory for Lalu Prasad Yadav can be easily construed as rigged. The upper castes have, over the years, resisted from entering into any kind of social churning, leave alone indulge in any meaningful self-criticism. There are a host of well-educated, cultured and in many ways, men of exceptional credibility in the Congress and BJP. They, however, often belong to the Dwija category, which is losing its grip over the political power structure. In the early 1930s, there was a big riot between Yadavs and Dwijas in Bihar. The riot had a unique genesis. The Yadavas had decided to adopt the Upanayana (the sacred triple thread), which entitles people to enter the Dwija social basket. This was unacceptable to the upper castes and the riot followed. The British government had to impose mass penalty on the Dwijas.
The traditional lower castes, the Shudras in the classical order, or OBCs in the contemporary discourse, can't in any manner relate themselves to the Dwija leadership. To them, a dubious Lalu or Mulayam Singh Yadav would remain preferable to others despite their many idiosyncrasies. These leaders would succeed in mobilising their people by invoking history. The memory of the past practices of the Dwijas and the smriti-smruti tradition of their subjugation for ages is too much of a factor behind their political decision.
The Dwijas, instead of acknowledging their past and apologising for all their crimes, prefer to go on the counter-offensive. Due to their numerical weakness, they have been losing out in electoral politics. Once a dominant social category, the Dwijas have no social friends today. They operate on the space provided by the Congress and the BJP and try to work out newer social alliances. The friction within the larger Shudra category gives them hope. But, those Shudras who align with the upper caste-led Congress or the BJP, loose credibility within their community. The Dwijas, therefore, are on the run. Lalu or Uma Bharati have a larger social appeal. The Dwija political leadership has been clueless about the wider ramifications of this social phenomenon.
Finding their political isolation helpless, the Dwijas in the non-political realm - bureaucracy, media, academia, business and art - have taken upon themselves the mission to reinstall their hegemony. The methods they deploy are too well-known: Humiliation, lampooning, and deceit, to mention only a few.
Saptarishi himself, who in all likelihood is a Dwija, is a case in point. He is supposed to have made casteist remark against the then SP of Gopal Ganj. At that point of time, the NDA was expected to win. It is quite possible that the two election commissioners had actually made casteist remarks, but Saptarishi did not object as he too was on a similar mission. Assuming that the two election commissioners did not make any such remark, and yet Saptarishi is making such allegations, it may be assumed that the prompt is coming from the realisation that power has changed hands. Knowing that Lalu is a major player, Saptarishi may have played the caste card to secure for himself a post-retirement assignment.
The media had chosen Lalu as tool to lampoon the Shudra leadership. Lalu played into the hands of the media, and would often present himself as a clown, which he is not. Lalu has many a cultured Shudra colleague, but the media would focus those with considerable criminal behaviour. This worked to Lalu's advantage, his people took him as their hero. The media presents Mulayam Singh Yadav as a wrestler, suggesting that he is more brawn than brain. This ploy backfired, because both Lalu and Mulayam benefited from the type-casting. This has effectively thrown the upper castes out of the political power structure.
This whole episode opens a much larger picture: Indians are born out of caste unions, they grow up in caste categories harbouring all kinds of biases and prejudices. As a universal phenomenon, people are never autonomous of the society they are born and brought up in. A European, for instance, will not go to a beach in a suit. The same European will not go to office in a swimsuit. Did nature prescribe this dress code? No, it's society which demands such dress codes. Likewise, a person born in India will be bound by social codes to live out his entire life. If India is a caste society, its people are "caste-people", with caste biases and prejudices almost genetically ingrained.
India, at this juncture of history when societies elsewhere are seeking moderation - often under the leadership of the traditional elite itself - is witnessing a fight for the re-installation of old-world domination. This is a bad signal for the future. The Dwijas who are outside the realm of politics should participate in the social churning, targeting their past to begin with. If that were to a remote possibility, then we all had it- India is fast falling into a new phase of de-democratisation.
<b>(The author is a commentator on social and political issues from the Dalit perspective)</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Â <b>Is this the Empire's revenge? </b>
Chandrabhan Prasad
Now himself under cloud for having made a casteist remark against Anil Kumar Yadav, the then SP of Gopal Ganj, the controversial IAS officer, Mr LV Saptarishi, has unintentionally triggered off a new debate. Do senior officers make casteist remarks at the work place? Or, do traditional upper caste people make casteist remarks against people of the lower castes? What in this case seems certain is that, either the two Election Commissioners in question had actually made the remark as being alleged Mr Saptarishi, or Saptarishi himself had made that remark against the SP of Gopalganj, and knew that such remarks can be made, and somebody else implicated of casteist tendencies on grounds such as this.
Given the timing of Saptarishi's "disclosure", and the way he did it - holding a press conference like a politician - he has, in all likelihood, worked in tandem with the RJD to market Lalu's "victimhood". Whatever be the circumstances, and intent of Saptarishi, the issue raised by him needs further attention. In yet another case, Mr VP Shetty, chairman of the Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI), has been accused of making a casteist remark against Dalits. He was arrested and released on bail.
Mr Shetty, Mr Saptarishi, or the two Election Commissioners, are no ordinary citizens as they hold high positions. To many, there is an element of doubt as to how can people like them could make casteist remarks. To the victims, however, casteist remarks may be a reality. A casteist remark, or remarks meant to humiliate an individual on the basis of his/her social origin, may occur in various forms. A person with a higher level of sophistication may be quite subtle while somebody less bright may be quite brutal. But the hurt caused may be of the same level.
India is caste-society, built by bricks of bias and prejudice. Castes all over India have "caste-jokes" meant to denigrate others. "Teen tagava par biswas mat karna": In English this means: "Never believe men of triple threads (Brahman, Kshatriya, and Vaishya)". Another one goes: "Sath saala hai". In English, this roughly translates as "he is sixty years of age" (hence a Yadav), and entitled to wisdom. Now sample this: "Padha likha jat, solah doona ath" which says "to an educated Jat, sixteen multiplied by two is equivalent to eight".
Since the Yadavas have traditionally been perceived as a violent people, even a fair electoral victory for Lalu Prasad Yadav can be easily construed as rigged. The upper castes have, over the years, resisted from entering into any kind of social churning, leave alone indulge in any meaningful self-criticism. There are a host of well-educated, cultured and in many ways, men of exceptional credibility in the Congress and BJP. They, however, often belong to the Dwija category, which is losing its grip over the political power structure. In the early 1930s, there was a big riot between Yadavs and Dwijas in Bihar. The riot had a unique genesis. The Yadavas had decided to adopt the Upanayana (the sacred triple thread), which entitles people to enter the Dwija social basket. This was unacceptable to the upper castes and the riot followed. The British government had to impose mass penalty on the Dwijas.
The traditional lower castes, the Shudras in the classical order, or OBCs in the contemporary discourse, can't in any manner relate themselves to the Dwija leadership. To them, a dubious Lalu or Mulayam Singh Yadav would remain preferable to others despite their many idiosyncrasies. These leaders would succeed in mobilising their people by invoking history. The memory of the past practices of the Dwijas and the smriti-smruti tradition of their subjugation for ages is too much of a factor behind their political decision.
The Dwijas, instead of acknowledging their past and apologising for all their crimes, prefer to go on the counter-offensive. Due to their numerical weakness, they have been losing out in electoral politics. Once a dominant social category, the Dwijas have no social friends today. They operate on the space provided by the Congress and the BJP and try to work out newer social alliances. The friction within the larger Shudra category gives them hope. But, those Shudras who align with the upper caste-led Congress or the BJP, loose credibility within their community. The Dwijas, therefore, are on the run. Lalu or Uma Bharati have a larger social appeal. The Dwija political leadership has been clueless about the wider ramifications of this social phenomenon.
Finding their political isolation helpless, the Dwijas in the non-political realm - bureaucracy, media, academia, business and art - have taken upon themselves the mission to reinstall their hegemony. The methods they deploy are too well-known: Humiliation, lampooning, and deceit, to mention only a few.
Saptarishi himself, who in all likelihood is a Dwija, is a case in point. He is supposed to have made casteist remark against the then SP of Gopal Ganj. At that point of time, the NDA was expected to win. It is quite possible that the two election commissioners had actually made casteist remarks, but Saptarishi did not object as he too was on a similar mission. Assuming that the two election commissioners did not make any such remark, and yet Saptarishi is making such allegations, it may be assumed that the prompt is coming from the realisation that power has changed hands. Knowing that Lalu is a major player, Saptarishi may have played the caste card to secure for himself a post-retirement assignment.
The media had chosen Lalu as tool to lampoon the Shudra leadership. Lalu played into the hands of the media, and would often present himself as a clown, which he is not. Lalu has many a cultured Shudra colleague, but the media would focus those with considerable criminal behaviour. This worked to Lalu's advantage, his people took him as their hero. The media presents Mulayam Singh Yadav as a wrestler, suggesting that he is more brawn than brain. This ploy backfired, because both Lalu and Mulayam benefited from the type-casting. This has effectively thrown the upper castes out of the political power structure.
This whole episode opens a much larger picture: Indians are born out of caste unions, they grow up in caste categories harbouring all kinds of biases and prejudices. As a universal phenomenon, people are never autonomous of the society they are born and brought up in. A European, for instance, will not go to a beach in a suit. The same European will not go to office in a swimsuit. Did nature prescribe this dress code? No, it's society which demands such dress codes. Likewise, a person born in India will be bound by social codes to live out his entire life. If India is a caste society, its people are "caste-people", with caste biases and prejudices almost genetically ingrained.
India, at this juncture of history when societies elsewhere are seeking moderation - often under the leadership of the traditional elite itself - is witnessing a fight for the re-installation of old-world domination. This is a bad signal for the future. The Dwijas who are outside the realm of politics should participate in the social churning, targeting their past to begin with. If that were to a remote possibility, then we all had it- India is fast falling into a new phase of de-democratisation.
<b>(The author is a commentator on social and political issues from the Dalit perspective)</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->