On Thursday 19 Jul 2007 6:40 pm, Srini Ramakrishnan wrote: > On 7/19/07, shiv sastry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > > > > A classical example is the state of Rwanda. > > > > Thanks for taking the trouble. I presume you have been to Rwanda - > > because that is the thing required for credibility isn't it? > > Ashok seems to travel a lot around those parts, I dare say the answer is > yes?
In the absence of any other opinion I will assume that the example of Rwanda is accurate and credible. I will post the conclusions made after those remarks because I think there are some very interesting extrapolations that I can make from that, and I will make a series of statements based on that. First the quote from Ashok: On Thursday 19 Jul 2007 3:20 pm, ashok _ wrote: > It is a law of nature for one person to exploit another, and it > has been replicated in societal structures. > its got nothing to do with any religion, unless of course you are the > type who worships a higher power for salvation or consults the sai > baba. If social stratification, described as "caste" in Rwanda has "got nothing to do with any religion", then the caste system in India too has nothing to do with religion, and has (presumably) arisen and evolved separately from religion. If there is no connection between caste and religion in India, it means that any linkage of Hindu fundamentalists with the caste system could be an error that takes the attention away from a whole lot of moderate Hindus who reside in the higher and more privileged caste strata in India who are also responsible for perpetuation of the system. I have deliberately referred to moderate and fundamentalist Hindus, and I will try and make the reason clear below. One would expect that a system designed to break down caste barriers would therefore be opposed by people in the privileged upper caste layers, particularly Hindus because non Hindus have opted out of any responsibility for the caste system, and in any case do not amount to more than 20% of the population. And in fact one does find many moderate Hindus opposed to caste based reservation that threatens their status on the basis of their caste (as opposed to empowering others). Now look at the outcastes of India, the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, and the status of religious minorities in India, specifically Muslims and Christians. It has been said that many scheduled tribes are not Hindus at all, and are animists, and that Hindu fundamentalists are trying to include them under the classification "Hindu". In the meantime there have been moves to win hearts and minds and harvest souls - so some percentage of the scheduled castes and tribes have been converted to Islam or Christianity. One of the ongoing battles between moderate Hindus and Hindu fundamentalists in India has been on the question of Hindu fundamentalist opposition to Muslims and Christians while they seek to impose a "Hindu" label on the scheduled castes and tribes. The moderates seemingly disagree with the fundamentalists on all counts. Or do they? But both "moderate" and "fundamentalist" Hindus seem to have concurred and agreed that "caste" is a Hindu burden, and that those people who belong to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes who have NOT converted to Islam or Christianity can, for all practical purposes be considered Hindus and avail of reservation. Reservation is like a game of snakes and ladders in which a SC/ST person who has not converted is placed on a square with a ladder that takes him straight up. That square is unavailable to Muslims and Christians. In the meantime the powers that be of Christianity and Islam have shot themselves in the foot by disowning the caste system as something that does not occur in Christianity or Islam. Furthermore the powers that be of Christianity and Islam have been deftly checkmated by an alliance of Hindu moderates and fundamentalists that has accepted SCs and STs as "Hindus" and have allowed them to rise in the system based on the quid pro quo of their accepting the label "Hindu" And while this happens, the seemingly non religious and secular caste system has ensured that SCs and STs who convert to Islam or Christianity stay at the bottom and those who are "Hindu" rise toward the top by virtue of the convenient Hindu moderate/fundamentalist marriage. Does religion really have nothing to do with caste? Is caste and advantage or disadvantage? Is caste Hindu problem or not? shiv
