Very interesting/important article!
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Goanet Reader <[email protected]>wrote: > Taking Caste Seriously > Why the Goan Fitna needs a rigorous caste-based analysis > > By Jason Keith Fernandes > [email protected] > > Subsequent to the conclusion of the public meeting held on > March 13, 2009 at the Clube National against the Ordinance > amending the Land Acquisition Act, a little group gathered to > catch up with each other and throw around a few ideas. > > In the midst of this camaraderie, one of the colleagues, no > doubt charged with emotion after the meeting, proposed a > route to mobilizing against the Ordinance. "Why don't we > mobilize on the basis of caste," she said. "The situation on > hand is clearly about caste. The Ordinance benefits hotels > (Marriot and Cidade) owned by the Saraswats, while on the > other hand the fisherfolk loosing their homes to the CRZ, the > village groups to mining are all clearly from 'lower' caste > backgrounds." > > If there was any levity in the group it all melted away with > that statement. They looked at her in shocked silence for a > while, and then threw up their hands! "Oh no", they said. "We > don't believe in caste! We can't do that" > > Now I don't as yet want to explore the possibilities as to > whether there is in fact a Saraswat-versus-the-rest divide in > our society that is at the root of the troubles that Goa is > facing. What I would like to take up however is the response > of the group to this suggestion. > > "We don't believe in caste" and therefore we cannot > mobilize on the basis of caste. One very often runs > into this sort of response, especially when it is > so clearly evident that the battles that are being > fought are in fact being fought by 'lower caste > groups struggling for recognition, livelihood or > access to justice. The very simple question that I > would like to ask these touch-me-nots therefore is > the following: does the acknowledgement of racial > discrimination make us racist? > > It shouldn't be difficult for Indians to answer this > question. Most Indians who have gone abroad, and more > recently almost any Indian, after such fiascos as > Harbhajan's "Teri maa ki/ you monkey" escapade, will > vociferously claim that they are racially discriminated > against by Whites. > > If they then recognize that they are being racially > discriminated against, does this now mean that all of us > Indians are racist? Clearly not! If therefore we can admit > the fact that the mere recognition of discrimination on the > basis of race does not make us racist; then similarly the > recognition of discrimination on the basis of caste does not > make us casteist. To what then can we attribute our > hesitation to discuss caste-based discrimination? > > In 1932 in the course of the Second Round Table, Dr. Ambedkar > raised the issue of separate electorates for the > Untouchables. The concept of separate electorates had already > been extended to other minority groups, including the Sikhs > and the Muslims. > > Gandhi however would have none of this. Arguing that this > would result in the disintegration of the Hindu community, he > took to his favourite method of protest, the fast. As his > health worsened, Ambedkar was forced to give up his demand > for separate electorates and settled for reservations, while > the Untouchables were included, against their will, into a > combined Hindu electorate. > > I raise this fact of history to argue that the > suppression of caste questions has been a > fundamental feature of Indian political > mobilization, especially that of the national > struggle. The issue of caste-based discrimination > was just not seen to be as important as that of the > larger objectives of independence. Since the > questions of upper-caste dominance were not > effectively addressed prior to Independence, the > departure of the British resulted in the > upper-caste dominance of the country that we are > witness to today. > > It is my belief, that no issue of justice in this country can > be effectively addressed, unless we also seriously address > the issue of caste-based discrimination. > > Our failure to do so is ultimately based on our own > membership within dominant caste groups that benefit from the > status-quo that result from not addressing caste-based > inequalities. > > Our discomfort with discussing the inequalities born of caste > is not because we don't believe in caste. On the contrary, it > is because we know that once we open that Pandora's box, the > benefits that have accrued to us, and not to others, will > become so blatantly obvious. The popular leaders of the many > movements in Goa, do not want to discuss caste justice, > because for them caste justice is not an issue. It is not a > priority for them. Their priorities lie elsewhere. > > We may not believe in caste, and yet we practice it on a > daily basis, through the minor inflections of our speech, by > how seriously we take people, by what we consider beautiful > and what ugly. We practice caste-based discrimination when we > recognize that some people have fallen on bad times, and > other people are just poor, when we recognize some people as > coming from 'old families' and others as having 'no culture'. > > Taking caste seriously would allow us to rupture > the communal divides of Catholic, Muslim and Hindu > along which we tend to break society down into. > Inquire into caste, and you will see how groups > mobilize not necessarily across religious lines, > but definitely along caste lines. > > When they do mobilize along religious lines, it would be > interesting to see whose interests are being served by this > mobilization. Is it merely that of the upper-caste groups > within the religious fold, or is it the interests of all of > the caste-groups? > > Surprisingly, it is an emphasis on caste in such states as > Bihar that has curbed the growth of both Hindutva, as well as > Muslim fundamentalism. It is in light of these arguments that > I am personally convinced that an emphasis on caste would in > fact help the ongoing Goan upheaval ('fitna') take up the > essential justice questions that must be addressed if the > so-called 'Goan negativity' has to end. > > Having said so, there is a need for us to subsequently > articulate the learning from caste-based analysis > sensitively. Our caste locations provide us with a > predilection for certain positions. These positions may not > be shared by all persons based on their own caste locations. > > It is true that not everyone within a dominant caste will > give up their unequal privileges without a fight. However > there will be those from such a caste, who will see the > point, and lend support to the fight for equality. > > To argue that one's mere location in a caste makes one > anti-egalitarian is to fall right back into the casteist > trap. Thus what one will eventually fight are the monsters of > Brahmanism, rather than Brahmins themselves. > > Having said this however, alliances need to necessarily be > forged among the Dalit groups in the Goa. There is really no > alternative before us. Such an alliance will help us curb the > evils that Brahmanism has bred in our State and country; that > of Hindutva, the accompanying ills of minority (Muslim, Sikh, > Christian) fundamentalisms in the country, as well as the > orgy of consumerism that is pushing many in this country and > also in Goa, into the arms of a slow, shameful and miserable > death. [Comments welcomed at http://www.dervishnotes.blogspot.com] > > First published in the Gomantak Times, Mar 18, 2009. >
