Hi Rajan While it is possible to believe in the idea of caste without linking it to casteism, I suggest that such a view may be highly questionable and I explain why below.
If we ask ourselves when would someone claim to believe in caste? It could, in UNLIKELY circumstances, be when one has been led to believe oneself to be among the lowest of the low (say for example a Dalit) and that, there are a lot of people superior to one by birth. However, the political resistance among say the 114 million Dalits in India suggests that they reject their racist/casteist position and demand equal human rights that the Indian Constitution indeed legally provides for them. This tends to be to the utter chagrin of the upper castes who invariably do not believe in equal human rights and are keen to treat the 'lowest' castes as vermin to be eradicated through murder if need be. This fact is well recorded in the literature and the media. I therefore politely suggest that, the greater likelihood of a belief in caste will arise among those who believe that, they are in the upper reaches of caste. I assume you would agree with this simple reasoning and on the assumption that you do, I ask, what then does such upper caste positioning entail? I suggest that, it assumes superiority over others, except for those in the same caste group who band together if for no other reason than that, status is always contested. A good example of this is the historical contest between the Brahmins and the Chardos in Goa. In such social dynamics, there are ipso facto deemed 'inferiors' relative to those who think and believe that, they are at the apex of the status hierarchy. This would not matter greatly if superior status was earned through character and achievement as in social class stratification. However, caste claims to social superiority are based fundamentally on an accident of birth and nothing else and as so often reiterated among others, by Goanetter Mario Goveia. Herein lies the casteism when someone says that he believes in caste. Such a person is unconsciously a casteist without necessarily behaving in a casteist manner but is well primed, through indoctrination, to be casteist in practise when necessary! The clue dear Rajan, lies in the properties in the concept of caste whenever someone claims caste status and I put it to you that a claim to a belief in caste is not neutral. It is pregnant with meaning (about those believed to be inherently and in perpetuity, uppers and lowers), in the caste hierarchy. High caste status has not been earned through ACHIEVEMENT but through ASCRIPTION or ascribed status through birth. Such caste status is then 'imposed' upon others through highly questionable and indefensible criteria that I am inclined to dismiss as bogus criteria. In short, the insidious nature of the evil of caste and its effects, whether in great intensity as with the Dalits, or with lesser intensity as in Goa IS unmistakably destructive and NOT a myth. I very much hope you will reply to this post and I therefore keenly await to hear from you this time! Later, we can address the other points you raise about race, nation and Islam. Regards Cornel Da Costa, London, UK. --- "Rajan P. Parrikar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To Goanet - > Frederick [FN] Noronha wrote: Can you have caste without casteism? Yes, you can. Just as you can have race > without racism, nation without nationalism, > Islam without Islamism...you get the idea. > > It is perlexing that these simple matters > are as yet unknown to you. > Warm regards, > r
