|
| | Home | About Us | Contact Us | Community Activities | News | Photo Gallery | Articles | Culture | Media | Literature | |
| | Dr. Ambedkar | Kanshi Ram | Babu Mangoo Ram | Ad-Dharm | The Gurus | Lord Buddha | Letter Box | Great Personalities | |
|
|
Guru Ravidass, one of the famous untouchable saint- poets of the 15 th-16 th century, is by far the most revered among the scheduled castes, especially Chamars/Chambhars/Charmakars of northwest and central India . Although they occupy the very bottom of the social hierarchy, the Chamārs and other Untouchable groups who worship Guru Ravidass do not passively accept their inferior status. Their worship of Ravidass is the manifestation of a dissident socioreligious ideology. The mere mention of his name evokes a sense of confidence and self-respect among them. So much so that a large number of them prefer to be identified as ‘Ravidassia’ rather than be known by their customary caste titles colored with derogatory connotations. Although in the past Ravidas’s low status may have presented a problem, his present-day admirers strive to affirm it, not deny it. They are popularly known as Ravidassia Dalits or Ravidassi Adharmis. In Punjab some of them are often confused with the Dalit Sikhs. Guru Ravidass is known as a leading star of the Bhakti movement, especially the nirguna sampradaya or sant parampara (sect or tradition of devotees of a formless God) of the later medieval centuries in Northern India . He was a cobbler, saint, poet, philosopher and social reformer. Together with Namdev and Kabir, Ravidas is one of the few Bhaktas to cross language barriers and become important in several parts of India . His popularity can be known from a variety of names attributed to him by his followers in different regions and languages. He is known as Raidasa, Rohidasa, Ruidasa, Ramadasa, Raedasa, Rohitasa, Rahdesa, Rav Das and Rab Das. His poetry has universal appeal. It is full of radical fervor and boundless love for the formless God. Although the poetry of Ravidass is rich with references to the adoration of and longing for God, it also gave significant space to the “hope for a better world and a fight against exploiters, power-holders and oppression going on under the name of religion. His poetry reflected his vision of the social and spiritual needs of the downtrodden and underlined the urgency of their emancipation. He, therefore, is regarded as a messiah of the downtrodden. They revere him as devoutly as Hindus revered their Gods and Goddesses, and Sikhs their Gurus. They worship his image and showed their faith in his spiritual power. His hymns were recited every morning and night, and his birthday was celebrated as a religious event. They raise slogans like Ravidass Shakti Amar Rahe (the spiritual power of Ravidass live forever) during his birth anniversaries. Ravidass was born in Chamar caste, also known as Kutbandhla, one of the Scheduled Castes in Uttar Pradesh. Chamars are known by their profession of leather and tanning. They were oppressed and their touch and sight were considered polluting by the upper castes. Ravidass revolted against this inhuman system of untouchability. He adopted Bhakti as a mode of expression for his revolt. His Bhakti-based method of revolt was very novel and daring. It was novel because of its emphasis on compassion for all and absolute faith in God. The principle of compassion for all reflected the egalitarian traits of his social philosophy and struggle. His concept of the absolute faith in the formless God showed the apathy of the elites of his times towards the plights of the downtrodden for whose emancipation he had to seek refuge in no one else but God. His method was daring in the sense that he choose to imitate the Brahmins in order to symbolize his revolt which was not only highly objectionable but was equally deadly for a Shudra of his times. He challenged the tyranny of Brahmins and defied them by wearing Dhoti (cloth wrapped around the waist), Janeue (sacred thread) and Tilak (sacred red mark on forehead) that were forbidden for the untouchables. Though he attired himself like an upper caste, he did not hide his caste. He continued with his hereditary occupation of making/mending shoes. He, probably, tried to show that while adopting the prohibited dress and symbols of the upper castes, the lower castes could still keep their identity intact. Thus Ravidass provided an alternative model for the emancipation of the Dalits much (six centuries) before the articulation of the concept of sanskritization. What made the image of Ravidass a catalyst in the emergence of Dalit consciousness was his being a Shudra and at the same time a saint of very high repute. The process of sanskritization facilitated the ambitious lower castes to improve ‘its position in the local caste hierarchy’ by pretending to look like the higher castes that enjoy ‘great prestige’ in the hierarchically organized Brahminical social order. Since the caste is given and cannot be changed, the lower castes were left with no option but to imitate the culture of the upper castes. What made the emancipation project of Ravidass different from that of the sanskritization was his emphasis on acquiring social respect without crossing over the caste boundaries. He did not want to pretend to appear like an upper caste to ride the bandwagon of social prestige. On the contrary, he exhibited his protest against the social oppression by putting on the prohibited dress and symbols of the upper castes. By imitating the appearance of the upper castes he did not want the lower castes to abandon their caste to climb up the ladder of the caste hierarchy as in the process of sanskritization. The lower castes need not to be assimilated into the fold of higher castes. They had to, rather, assert for their human rights by challenging the caste hierarchy while being firm in their very caste group. He wanted to dismantle the norm of varnashram dharma (fourfold division of Hindu society based on graded rank system in caste hierarchy) by showing that lower castes were not beyond the pale of spiritual knowledge on the one hand and on the other that Brahmins were in fact hollow figures pumped up with false pride and hypocrisy. In fact, he used caste to cut the steel frame of caste based social order – the only way of Dalit emancipation. Thus, Ravidass gave a new meaning to Bhakti by projecting it as a method of social protest against the centuries old entrenched structures of Brahminical domination. He rejected all forms of religious rituals and sectarian formalities. He also commented graphically on the cursed and abject living conditions of millions of fellow downtrodden. Some scholars were of the opinion that though the devotional songs and hymns of Ravidass reflected the sufferings of the downtrodden, they lack the reformatory zeal and bitter condemnation of Brahminism and caste system that animated the poetry of Kabir and Tukaram. Though there is a difference in tone between the poetry of Kabir and Ravidass, both convey the same message. The poetry of Ravidass is known to be full of humility and devotion. But at the same time it is equally imbibed with reformatory zeal and concern for the downtrodden. Instead of bluntly snubbing the arrogance of higher castes, he undertook to raise the dignity of his own caste and profession, so that the higher castes could come to realize the shallowness of their self-imposed superiority. He advocated self-help for eliminating sufferings of the Dalits. His vision for self-help is clearly reflected in one of the legends about his refusal to make use of a Paras (a mythical stone that turns iron into gold) to get rich. He lent purity and respect to kirat (manual work), which also found special mention in the teachings of Guru Nanak Dev, the founder of Sikh faith. In fact, Ravidass’s life and poetry provided a vision to the downtrodden to struggle for their human rights and civic liberties. The Bhakti approach of Ravidass was a non-violent struggle for the emancipation and empowerment of the Shudras. Though he combined humility with Bhakti, his concept of formless God reflected an altogether different picture. Ravidass’s God was not humble at all in the typical sense of the term. He was graceful. He was not indifferent to the downtrodden. His God was rather bold who was not afraid of anyone. He elevated and purified the so-called untouchables. Aaisee lal tujh binu kaunu karai.Gareeb niwaaju guseea meraa maathai chhatar dharai… neecho uooch karai meraa govind kaahoo te na darai [refrain My Beloved, besides you who acts like this? Protector of the poor, my Master. You hold a royal umbrella over my head]. Ravidass further said Meri jaati kut bandhlaa dhor dhouwanta nithi baanaarasi aas paasaa. Ab bipar pardhan tihi karih danduouti tere naam sarnaaie Ravidass daasaa [My Caste is Kutabådhal ā ; I cart carcasses constantly around Benares . Now Brahmans and headmen bow down before me, Ravid ā s the servant has taken refuge in Your Name . It is in this context that his non-violent struggle based on Bhakti assumed special importance for the emancipation of the Dalits. He did not only adopt non–violence in his struggle against the social oppression, but also motivated the oppressors to abandon the path of violence. His low caste but high spiritual status posed a challenge to the Brahminical structures of domination. The traditional Brahminical institution of varnashram dharma failed to confront Ravidass’s pragmatic and revolutionary reasoning based on equality, dignity and fraternity. Instead, the Brahmins attempted to undermine his low caste profile by appropriating him in the Hindu fold. They concocted stories to project him as a Brahmin in his previous life. According to one of such stories, Ravidass was a Brahmin in his previous birth. But due to his bad habits of meat eating and the untouchable status of his co-wife he had to be born as a Chamar. Another story tells that Ramananda, his so-called Guru, cursed him in his previous life to be born in a family of untouchables on account of his accepting offerings from a local money lender who had dealings with leather workers. This itself indicates the degree of purity-pollution behaviours observed even by Brahmin ascetics. Moreover, this account also reinforces conventional opinions of Chamars as being extremely polluting. Ramanand curses his disciple not for taking food directly from Chamars, but from a person who merely does business with them. Yet even such indirect contact is enough to render the food impure. The story does not end here, however. It further informs that the baby Ravidass refused to accept the milk of his low caste mother. He accepted the milk of his mother only when Ramanand supposedly reminded him of his misbehavior in the previous life. Another story about his co-option in the Brahminical fold narrates that he had a golden sacred thread under his skin, though it was invisible on his body. When Brahmins declined to eat while sitting in the same row with him during a feast given in his honor by Jhali, the queen of Chittor, he left the room. But as they sat to dine, they found an image of Ravidass appearing at the side of each of them. The story also tells that he cut open his chest and revealed the sacred thread that lay within – a clear proof of his being a real Brahmin. Thus challenged by the surging popularity of Ravidass, among the lower and upper castes alike, Brahmins knitted layers of mythological narratives about his mythical high caste in his previous life. This was done, probably, to preclude the lower castes from rallying around his name. Yet another device adopted by the twice born to diminish his popularity was to present him as a Guru of the Chamars only. This was the final masterstroke to minimize his influence on the society as a whole. Though Ravidass was himself a Chamar, his egalitarian social philosophy won him many disciples among the upper castes too. Jhali, Queen of Chittor; Mirabai, Rajput princes and daughter-in-law of King of Mewar, Sangram Singh; Prince Veer Singh Dev Vaghela of Rewa of Madhya Pradesh; and Prince of Kanshi were the most prominent among them. Dalit activists and academics condemned the process of Brahminisation of Ravidass. They ridiculed the so-called Brahminical narratives and interpretations about Ravidass and also refused to accept Ramanand as his Guru. Ravidass never mentioned the name of Ramanand in his most authentic bani recorded in Adi Granth. Instead he mentioned the names of saint Jaidev, saint Namdev and saint Kabir. Some radical Dalits claim that his Guru was Sardanand, and emphasize his ability to defeat Brahmins time and again in debates. Thus the process of Brahminisation had not only failed to assimilate Ravidass in the fold of the upper castes, it further strengthened the bond of the Shudras with him. The latter took pride in being known as Ravidassias with Ravidass becoming the paragon of their struggle for social equality and dignity. Ravidass envisioned an egalitarian model of state for ensuring human rights and civil liberties for all alike. He called his ideal state as Begumpura (free from sorrows). In his ideal state no one would be discriminated against on the basis of caste and religion and everyone would be free from the burden of taxes and worries of food. His ideal state would be free from the graded system of caste hierarchy. There would be no segregated colonies for the downtrodden and they would be free to move around without caste prejudice. In other words, in Begumpura the evil of untouchability would cease to exist. Though Begumpura was an ideal state as visualized by Ravidass, it was not a mere figment of his mind. In fact, its articulation was based on in-depth understanding of the socio-economic and political conditions prevailing during his lifetime. He lived during the period when Shudras were doubly oppressed by their political masters along with the members of higher castes; and by the Brahmins, the custodians of Hindu religion. He had no hope from any quarter regarding the improvement of the conditions of the downtrodden. In one of his hymns he thus articulatedDardu dekh sab ko hasai, aaisee dasaa hamaaree. Ast dasaa sidi kar talai, sab kirpa tumhari. [Everyone laughs seeing my poverty, such is my state. The eighteen perfections are in the palm of my hands, all through your grace]. In fact, his entire poetry echoed a loud protest against slavery on the one hand and boundless love and devotion to the formless God on the other. He believed that God created all human beings and resided in all of them. If the same God pervaded the entire humanity, then it is foolish to divide the society on the basis of caste. He thus condemned the division of mankind on the basis of caste. He said Jo ham shehri so meet hamara [whoever is my fellow citizen, is my friend]. It is in this context that the egalitarian social philosophy of Ravidass expressed in the mode of poetry became the manifesto of the Dalit consciousness in Punjab . The establishment of a large number of Ravidass Deras by the Dalits in Punjab and in other parts of India over the last few years is a case in point. Ravidass became very popular among the Punjabi Dalit Diasporas as well, who have also constructed Ravidass shrines in order to assert their separate caste identity. Posted onwww.ambedkartimes.com ( February 20, 2008 )
The recent spate of Jat-Dalit conflicts in the north Indian state of Punjab has exploded the myth of the casteless character of the Sikh society. Dalits in Punjab are no longer better than their counterpart in other parts of India. However, what distinguished Punjab from the rest of country is that caste inequity persists here more in terms of landownership, social identification and dominant cultural patterns than of Brahminical orthodoxy. Though over the years the Dalits of Punjab have strengthened their economic position through sheer hard work, enterprise and affirmative action but they failed to achieve a commensurate improvement in their social status. Armed with the weapon of improved economic conditions and social consciousness, the Dalits mustered enough strength to ask for a concomitant rise in their social status. Such moves of the marginalised find staunch critics among the Jats who often view Dalit assertion as a form of challenge to their dominant status in the agrarian society of Punjab. This in turn has sharpened the contradictions between Jats and Dalits that ultimately led to a series of violent clashes between them.
|
|
Babu Mangoo Ram and Emancipation of the Dalits Babu Mangoo Ram Mugowalia, a renewed revolutionary and founder of the Ad Dharm movement in Punjab whose birth anniversary falls on 14th January 1886, sets a clear agenda for the emancipation and uplift of the Dalits. The agenda was: torestore the lost indigenous religion of the sons of the soils in order to provide them with a sense of self-respect and dignity. The method to achieve this agenda was: cultural transformation and spiritual regeneration. Mangoo Ram was not in favour of embracing any other existing religion including Buddhism. He was in favour of strengthening the Ad Dharm (the original) religion of the indigenous, pre Aryan people of India. His views on Hindu religion were very clear. He was of the opinion that since Dalits were not born Hindu where is the need to leave that religion and to embrace some other one. Mangoo RamMugowalia was of the opinion that the pre Aryan people/the sons of the soil/Achhuts had their own independent religion that was forced into oblivion under the cruel and oppressive rule of the alien Aryan. He thought it appropriate to empower Dalits by carving out a separate Dalit identity on the basis of their original indigenous religious strength (Ad Dharm). In the poster announcing the first annual meeting of Ad Dharm Movement, Mangoo Ram devoted the entire space to the hardships faced by the untouchables at the hands of the caste Hindus. He also made an appeal to the Achhuts to come together to chalk out a program for their liberation and upliftment while addressing the Chamars, Chuhras, Sansis, Bhanjhras, Bhils etc. as brothers, he said, We are the real inhabitants of this country and our religion is Ad Dharm. Hindu Qaum came from outside to deprive us of our country and enslave us. At one time we reigned over ‘Hind’. We are the progeny of kings; Hindus came down from Iran to Hind and destroyed our Qaum. They deprived us of our property and rendered us nomadic. They razed down our forts and houses, and destroyed our history. We are seven Crores in numbers and are registered as Hindus in this country. Liberate the Adi race by separating these seven crores. They (Hindus) became lord and call us ‘others’. Our seven crore number enjoy no share at all. We reposed faith in Hindus and thus suffered a lot. Hindus turned out to be callous. Centuries ago Hindus suppressed us sever all ties with them. What justice we expect from those who are the butchers of Adi race. Time has come, be cautious, now the Government listens to appeals. With the support of sympathetic Government, come together to save the race. Send members to the Councils so that our Qaum is strengthened again. British rule should remain forever. Make prayer before God. Except for this Government, no one is sympathetic towards us. Never consider us Hindus at all, remember that our religion is Ad Dharm. The way, the leaders of Ad Dharm chose to restore dignity and freedom to the untouchables was to completely detach them from Hinduism and to consolidate them into their own ancient religion - Ad Dharm - of which they had become oblivious during the age-old domination by the ‘alien Hindus’. In fact, the task of the revival of their ancient religion was not an easy one by virtue of the fact that during a long period of persecution at the hands of the Savarnas, the untouchables had forgotten their Gurus and other religious symbols. In fact they were never allowed to nurture an aspiration to have their own independent religion. They were condemned as profane and were declared unfit to have their own theology. Thus to revive Ad Dharm was tantamount to developing an altogether a new religion for the Achhuts. Mangoo Ram’s appeal that the Dalits were the real inhabitants of this land made an enormous psychological impact on the untouchables who were treated as, even inferior to animals in Indian society. The appeal inspired them to come out of their slumber and fight for their freedom and liberty. The Ad Dharm provided a theological podium to sustain and reinforce the new Dalit identity. For centuries, they were bereft of any identity and remained in the appendage of the hierarchically graded Hindu society. Ad Dharm movement was instrumental not only in helping the lower castes to get registered as a distinct religion in the 1931 census and providing them the platform to enter into the State Legislature, it also went a long way in bringing a cultural transformation in their life. In fact, Ad Dharm movement, as has been mentioned above, aimed at facilitating a cultural transformation in the life of lower castes that, under the impact of the centuries old system of degradation, had actually internalised a sense of being low and polluted. Mangoo Ram wanted to liberate them from such a state of mind and also to inculcate in them the feeling of dignity and self respect whereby they could start thinking about them as equal to the so-called twice-born people. Report of the Ad Dharm Mandal, 1926-1931 lists a number of moral principles and duties, which the followers of the Ad Dharm are required to adhere to for creating spiritual regeneration and cultural transformation in their lives. Among the most important moral principles and the duties mentioned in the report are: The basic principles listed in the Report are: (1) The essential teachings of the Ad Dharm will always be the same: no one can change them. They can stay alive and persist only through the help of a guru. (2) Every man and woman belongs to the faith, but they may not know it. To live without a guru is a sin. (3) A guru should be someone who truly and rightly knows the teachings of the previous masters. He should be able to distinguish between falsehood and truth. He should be able to bring peace and love within the community. (4) Everyone should be instructed by the lives of previous masters; progress comes from following the masters’ examples. The practices of previous masters should not be abandoned. This leads to progress. (5) There should not be any discrimination in regard to eating with other castes. (6) Ad Dharmis should abstain from theft, fraud, lies, dishonesty, looking at someone else’s wife with bad intentions, using anything which brings intoxication, gambling, and usurping other persons’ property or belongings. All of these things are against the law of nature and therefore the law of Ad Dharm. (7) Every Ad Dharmi has the duty to teach his children current knowledge and also to teach them to be obedient to the present king. (8) Every Ad Dharmi should read the Ad Prakash and act upon it. This is a foremost duty. (9) Ad Dharm does not believe in the caste system or any inferiority or superiority of this sort. (10) To learn and seek knowledge, and to learn and seek progress is compulsory for every man and woman. The twelve duties mentioned in the Report are as follows: (1) To publicize and propagate Ad Dharm. (2) To take pride in Ad Dharm. (3) To promote the use of name of the community and to use the red mark, which is its sign (4) Ad Dharmis should try to retrieve any property of fellow Ad Dharmi that has been usurped. (5) We should distinguish among Hindus, Ad Dharmis, and other communities of India . (6) Those books, which have created the problem of untouchability and led to discrimination - books such as the Laws of Manu and other Shastras – should be completely boycotted and abandoned. (7) We should celebrate the festivals of our gurus and follow our faith to the utmost. (8) Abandon idolatry. (9) Receive education for ourselves and others in the brotherhood. (10) Boycott those who curse us as “untouchables” or discriminate against us. (11) Bring all demands of Ad Dharmis before the government. (12) Abandon expensive marriage and practice of child marriage. The fifty-six commandments included in the Report are: (1) Each Ad Dharmi should know everything about the faith. (2) For the betterment and salvation of one’s body – physical and spiritual – one should recite the word soham. (3) Each Ad Dharmi should remember Guru Dev for half an hour each morning or evening. (4) When Ad Dharmis meet, their greeting should be “jai Guru Dev.” (5) We should be true followers of the founders, Rishi Valmiki, Guru Ravi Das, Maharaj Kabir, and Bhagwan Sat Guru Nam Dev. (6) a guru is necessary, one who knows about previous gurus and has all the capabilities of being a guru. (7) The wife of a guru should be regarded as one’s mother, the guru’s daughter as one’s sister. (8) Devotion to one’s wife should be a part of one’s faith, for therein lies salvation. (9) Every Ad Dharmi should abstain from theft, fraud, lies, dishonesty, and usurping the property of others. (11) One should not cause someone else heartache. There is no worse sin than this. (12) Every Ad Dharmi should enthusiastically participate in Ad Dharmi festivals and rituals. (13) There should be equally great happiness at the birth of both boys and girls. (14) After the age of five, every boy and girl should be given proper religious teaching. (15) Extravagant expenses at weddings are useless. Every marriage should be conducted according to rituals of our tradition. (16) Ad Dharmis should marry only Ad Dharmis. To marry someone outside Ad Dharm is not legal, but if someone does marry an outsider, he or she should be brought into the faith. (17) All Ad Dharmis, both men and women, should be obedient to their parents. (18) After the death of both parents it is the duty of each Ad Dharmi to cook food and distribute it among the poor. (19) The dead should be cremated, except for those under the age of five, who should be buried. (20) Ad Dharmis do not follow any other law except their own. (21) In the Ad Dharm faith only one marriage is allowed, but a husband may marry after the death of his wife. Also, if the first wife does not bear children, the husband may take another wife, provided he has the consent of the first wife. If this happens, the first wife remains a legal wife, with all the rights she had before. (22) Ad Dharmis should marry their children to the Ad Dharmis of the surrounding areas. (23) A girl should be more than twelve years old at the time of the marriage. The boy should be four years older than the girl. (24) It is illegal to receive money for a bride; on the other hand, there should not be a dowry. Those who sell their daughters commit a very great sin. (25) Offerings and sacrifices for prayers should be given only to those holy men who are Ad Dharmi and who have shown themselves to follow Ad Dharmi principles religiously. (26) It is necessary for each Ad Dharmi to provide primary education to both boys and girls. (27) The girls should be educated especially in household work such as sewing and needlework. (28) Young girls and boys should not be sent out to cut grass and gather wood. (29) It is the duty of parents not to allow young widowed daughters to remain in their household, because a young widowed daughter is a cause of disgrace. (30) If an Ad Dharmi widow with children wants to hold a commemoration of her deceased husband, but cannot afford it, then the Ad Dharm Mandal of Jullundur and its members will help her. (31) It is not good to cry and beat oneself at a death or funeral. To do so is to anger Guru Dev. (32) Among the Ad Dharmis sons and daughters should receive an equal inheritance. (33) To eat the meat of a dead animal or bird is against the law of Ad Dharm. (34) To use wine or any other intoxicants is a sin, except in the case of sickness. (35) It is legal to eat food offered at noon – Ad Dharm marriages, but the food should be decent, and not leftovers. (36) Cleanliness is important. It guaranteed good health. (37) It is forbidden to practice idolatry and worship statues, and one should not believe in magic, ghosts, or anything of the sort. (38) All Ad Dharmis should forget notions of caste and untouchability and work toward the unity of all people in the world. (39) Each Ad Dharmi should help a fellow Ad Dharmi in need. (40) One Ad Dharmi must not work at a place where another Ad Dharmi works until the first Ad Dharmi has been paid his wages. (41) If Ad Dharmis enter into a dispute with one another, they should attempt to come to some agreement by themselves or within the community. If no agreement is accomplished, they should refer the case to the Ad Dharm Mandal, Jullundur , and the Executive Committee will take action. (42) Ad Dharmis should open shops and business in every village. (43) Every Ad Dharmi should be a missionary for the faith. (44) Ad Dharmis should call themselves such and register in the census as “Ad Dharmi”. (45) A Red turban on the head is mandatory, for it is the color of our ancestors. (46) Every Ad Dharmi should work hard for the progress and peace of the community. (47) Ad Dharmis hould organize themselves into cadres called martyrdom cells. They should work hard on the Ad Dharm’s projects. (48) Each Ad Dharmis hould separate himself form Hindus, Sikhs, and members of other religions. (49) Each Ad Dharmi should be a good citizen, a patriot loyal to the present government, and should follow the law of the land. (50) Ad Dharmis have the obligation to consider the Ad Dharm Mandal of Punjab , city of Jullundur , as their rightful representative, and to recognize that the programs of the AD Dharm are for their benefit. (51) It is the duty of every Ad Dharmi to trust the Ad Dharm Mandal of Jullundur , and to share its work. (52) All local branches of the Ad Dharm should be certified by the Ad Dharm Mandal of Jullundur , and those, which are not certified, should not be considered genuine. (53) All Ad Dharmis should save their fellow Ad Dharmis from fraud and selfishness on the part of other communities. If such a situation arises, the Mandal should be informed. (54) Each Ad Dharmi should report any difficulty concerning the community to the Mandal in Jullundur . (55) Ad Dharmis should subscribe to the qaum’s newspaper, Adi Danka. They should receive it regularly, read it regularly, and help support it regularly. (56) Anyone violating the laws of the Ad Dharm or of the guru, or who insults these laws in one way or another, will be liable to punishment, even the greatest punishment – being banished from the community. The main emphasis of these commandments, principles and duties, in the opinion of Babu Mangoo Ram, was to strengthen the social, cultural and religious life of the Dalits so that it could help them build Dalit Solidarity and empowerment . Posted on www.ambedkartimes.com ( January 14, 2008 ) |
Guru Ravidass: Prophet of Dalit Consciousness
|
|
Punjab has been a site of invasions, conflicts, agitations and martyrdoms. It has also been a boiling cauldron for various social and political movements. Its history is rich with innumerable instances of people’s upsurge against the tyrant systems. However, what makes the case of Punjab, a unique, is that its tirades against the system of oppression and violence remained always progressive and secular. They were not against a particular caste or community but against systems of tyranny and oppression.
Ad Dharm Movement: The Genesis
Ad Dharm: Socio-Political Settings
Mangoo Ram And Ad Dharm
Having settled in his native village, he opened up a school for the lower caste children in the village. Initially, the school was opened up, temporarily in the garden of Risaldar Dhanpat Rai, a landlord of his village. Later on, Lamberdar Beeru Ram Sangha, another landlord of the same village, donated half-acre land for the purpose of formally opening up the school. The school had five teachers including Mangoo Ram. 7 Now-a-days, the school land has been declared as Shamlat (common land) and no remnants of the building exist except the old dilapidated structure of the well meant for drinking water in the school. It was in that school that the first official meeting of the Ad Dharm movement was held on June 11-12, 1926. There is another version about the school which traced its origin to the support provided by the Arya Samaj (Juergensmeyer 2000: 224). However, given his close association with the Ghadar movement in California, Mangoo Ram’s relationships with the Arya Samaj was not as close as that of Vasant Rai, Thakur Chand and Swami Shudra Nand. Moreover, his personal experience of being treated as an equal in America, particularly by his fellow Ghadarites, inculcated in him an intense desire and inspiration for equality and social justice. This led him to lay the foundation of the Ad Dharm movement to streamline the struggle against Untouchability. Soon he emerged as a folk-hero of the dalits who started rallying around him, particularly in the dalit concentrated areas of the Doaba region. However, after a while the Ad Dharm organisation got factionalised resulting in a split in 1929 into two groups: one headed by Vasant Rai and the other by Mangoo Ram. There emerged two independent organisations: the Ad Dharm Mandal with its office in Jalandhar was headed by Mangoo Ram and the All Indian Ad Dharm Mandal with its headquarters in Lyalpur was headed by Vasant Rai.8
In the poster10 announcing the first annual meeting of Ad Dharm Movement, Mangoo Ram11 devoted the entire space to the hardships faced by the untouchables at the hands of the caste Hindus. He also made an appeal to the Achhuts to come together to chalk out a program for their liberation and upliftment while addressing the Chamars, Chuhras, Sansis, Bhanjhras, Bhils etc. as brothers, he said, We are the real inhabitants of this country and our religion is Ad Dharm. Hindu Qaum came from outside to deprive us of our country and enslave us. At one time we reigned over ‘Hind’. We are the progeny of kings; Hindus came down from Iran to Hind and destroyed our qaum. They deprived us of our property and rendered us nomadic. They razed down our forts and houses, and destroyed our history. We are seven Crores in numbers and are registered as Hindus in this country. Liberate the Adi race by separating these seven crores. They (Hindus) became lord and call us ‘others’. Our seven crore number enjoy no share at all. We reposed faith in Hindus and thus suffered a lot. Hindus turned out to be callous. Centuries ago, Hindus suppressed us, sever all ties with them. What justice we expect from those who are the butchers of Adi race. Time has come, be cautious, now the Government listens to appeals. With the support of sympathetic Government, come together to save the race. Send members to the Councils so that our qaum is strengthened again. British rule should remain forever. Make prayer before God. Except for this Government, no one is sympathetic towards us. Never consider ourselves as Hindus at all, remember that our religion is Ad Dharm.12
Dominant Castes, Violence and Ad Dharm
Dharm And Dalit Identity
DALIT ASSERTION AND CASTE CONFLICTS IN PUNJAB...
|
LAL SINGH DIL (APRIL 11,1943 - AUGUST 14, 2007) Lal Singh Dil, Radical Dalit poet, left an indelible mark on the on-going struggle for equality, social justice and freedom. Dil bade us all adieu at DMC hospital, Ludhiana, where he took his last breath at 8 p.m. on 14 August 2007. Dil was born on 11 April 1943 at his maternal village. After doing his matric from Samrala, he studied for a year at A.S. College; Khana. He also did Junior Basic Training for two years. However, the hard economic conditions did not allow him to continue his studies. Though he was forced to discontinue the study formally, he did not cease to read his surroundings. He kept on reflecting on the exploitative system till his last moment. The method that he chooses for his analysis as well as struggle was poetry. He was one of the most popular and serious poets of the Naxal Movement in Punjab of the late 1960s. He was in the forefront of the Naxal Lehar and fell victim to inhuman torture during his arrest in 1969. He remained in jail for a long period of time. It was during his imprisonment that his first collection of radical poetry published in 1971 entitled “Satlej De Hawa". His poetry immediately became an icon of the revolutionary struggle in Punjab as well as of the sorrows and sufferings of the poors and Dalits in the state. After his release from the jail he went underground where he spent about 15 years of his active life. He did all sorts of labour to keep his struggle going on. He did not ask any help from any quarter and gave much to the society. He kept on writing and penned two more books: "Buhat Saren Suraj" (1982), "Sathar" (1997) and an autobiography "Dastan". His entire poetry is available in “Nag Loke" collection. Dil was a very fine comrade. He never liked to receive fame. He was happy to work incognito. He used to often present in many of the progressive programmes in different parts of the state, but no one had found him ever making any effort to make his presence felt. He believed in action rather in self propagation. He did never complained of about his personal concerns. He was a reticent but full of burning volcano within. He wanted to see radical transformation taking place in his very life time and an end to the sufferings of the poors and the Dalits. Let us all resolve to continue his struggle till the goal is achieved that will be the right tribute to the departed spirit. Ronki Ram (Dr.), POSTED ON AUGUST 15, 2007 |
CAPITAL VERSUS LABOUR
Globalisation is one of the few concepts in social sciences, which has suddenly acquired a vast currency in almost all of its disciplines. It has led to the creation of a large body of literature encompassing varied definitions, interpretations, and explanations. The term globalisation has been employed to refer to different processes, structures, interactive networks, rhetoric, and discourses. Each one of these perspectives has further been categorised into a large number of issue areas with specific set of rules, norms and episteme. Such a plethora of varied contents of globalisation, and its multi-dimensional connotations, has produced enormous shades of meanings with an equally wide range of contexts (Rangarajan 2003). The present study is confined to one such context. That context refers to ‘pro capital’ and ‘anti labour’ postulates of the process of globalisation. This paper also intends to highlight that as a process, globalisation is a continuation of a system of capital accumulation and exploitation that started with the onset of imperialism (from about 1870 to 1914, for details see Abdelal and Segal 2007; Patnaik 2004). Furthermore, ‘although globalisation had become the defining feature of the international economy at the beginning of the 21st century’, it remains considerably less globalised and integrated in comparison with that of the pre-1914 era (Gilpin 2001:3; see also O’Rourke and Williamson 2000; McGrew 2005:216). However, this aspect of the phenomenon of the process of globalisation is often left untouched and its current pattern “… is significantly exaggerated and thereby fundamentally misrepresented because globalists fail to locate it in its proper historical context” (McGrew 2005:216; see also Hoogvelt 2001). However, it should not be construed that the contemporary literature on the process of globalisation contains nothing essentially new. What makes a major difference between the age of imperialism and that of the process of globalisation is the pace of speed with which the events have been taking place in them (Rangarajan 2003). Recent developments in the field of communication infrastructures, informatics technology and transportation have restructured the equation of time and space to the extant that ‘local’ now remains no longer ‘local’ (Pauly 2005: 176-203). As Anthony McGrew observes, “Although, geography still matters it is nevertheless the case that globalisation is associated with a process of time-space compression – literally a shrinking world – in which the sources of even very localised economic developments, from price rises to corporate restructuring, may be traced to economic conditions on another continent” (McGrew 2005:210 emphasis in original). The shrinking of the world, and the recasting of geography, have become possible with the tremendous rise in the magnitude of the speed with which the events have been unfolding in the contemporary world that would have been unimaginable only a 100 years ago (Armstrong 1998: 466). The study speculates that the pace of the speed varies in its impact -- ranging from capital to labour -- and has something to do with the heightened level of exploitation of the marginalised. Globalisation, Dalits and the State The central theme of the paper focuses on how the process of globalisation has affected the lives of the marginalised, who had, hitherto, been looking forward towards the State for some support to stand on their own feet. Since the very logic of globalisation is based on the idea that the welfare state is a hindrance in the way of the global market, it is presumed that the marginalised need not be supported by the state at all as they used to be earlier. This has further deepened marginalisation and exclusion of the marginal groups and communities that were traditionally vulnerable and excluded (Rangarajan 2003). The rapid pace of transformation in the context of the market forces in the contemporary world has not only heightened the exploitation of the marginalised, but also severely limited the possibilities of their emancipation. Globalisation may have opened up enormous opportunities but one has to map the emphasis on the ‘opportunities’. In fact, in the asymmetrical world in which we live, such opportunities open many doors for the haves by further marginalising the interests of the have nots. “The global disparity obtains between countries and regions … gets translated into classes and categories within them. Indeed, it is reflected at the individual level too” (Oommen 1999). Capital and the Marginalised 'Marginal' – a very loose term – has been employed by different scholars to include different communities, individuals and social groups under its rubric. Broadly speaking, it encompasses the deprived sections of the society who have been subjected to social exclusion, economic deprivation and political isolation. It also includes gender, since the women are denied equal opportunities and rights (Bhattacharya [ed] 2004; Sivaraman 2000). In the context of the Indian society, it comprised Dalits (literally, grounded/oppressed/broken some of them designated constitutionally as Scheduled Castes), tribals (India’s indigenous peoples legally known as Scheduled Tribes), economically deprived groups/individuals (officially termed as Backward Castes), women, disabled and other vulnerable groups. Dalits is the “politically correct” nomenclature for the ex-untouchables who traditionally have been placed at the lowest rung of the Hindu caste hierarchy and were contemptuously called by different names like Shudras, Atishudras, Achhuts, Antyajas, Chandalas Pariahs, Dheds, Panchamas, Avarnas, Namashudras, Adi-Dravida, Ad Dharmis, Mazhabis, Harijans, Depressed Classes and Scheduled Castes. The ‘Dalit’ is a broad term that incorporates the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, and the Backward Castes. However, in the current political discourse, it is mainly confined to the Scheduled Castes and covers only those Dalits who are classified as Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists but excludes Muslim and Christian Dalits (Moliner 2004:2). Dalits v/s Upper Castes Poor The Dalits have been excluded from social, economic and political rights including the right to education and employment, other than the traditional forced and customary undignified labour, precisely because of their birth in the untouchable castes. They also suffered from social exclusion because of their geographical segregation. They were forced to live on the outskirts of the villages towards which the wind blew and sewage flowed. Their houses were dirty, dingy, dark, and unhygienic where poverty and squalor loomed large (for a detailed description see Madhopuri 2004). Until 1990, there had been some improvements in the lives of the Dalits in terms of education and employment opportunities, increase in wages, fall in poverty, access to land, water, health, education, housing and other resources owing to the State’s affirmative action. However, the trend was reverted and sidelined with the onset of the economic reforms under the process of globalisation. The economic policy in India has undergone a major transformation since the beginning of the early 1990s, under the paradigm of liberalisation, privatisation, and globalisation. One of the main concerns of this new paradigm is to facilitate the process of the roll back of the welfare State and prepare the space for the operation of the unrestrained market forces and open international trade. This pro-market and capital stance of the process of economic globalisation has led to the widening of the gap between the privileged few and the large mass of the marginalised, and among them the Dalit labourers, daily wage workers and workers in the informal sector suffer the most. It is pertinent to quote in this context Harish K. Puri, In fact the process of development tended to further marginalize some categories of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Judged by even the government statistics on all parameters – of jobs, literacy, access to drinking water, medical facilities, housing and even cremation of the dead, this vast segment of Indian people remained abysmally deprived and oppressed (Puri 2006:10). It has led to discontentment and disillusionment among the marginalised people of the society to who the main slogan of the World Social Forum – Another World is Possible – appeals the most, perhaps because they feel that it opens up the perspective of a world without exploitation and exclusion (A Report from Mumbai Resistance 2004 and the World Social Forum: 6; see also Asia Gears up against Globalisation: 1-2). World Social Forum aims at not only building up a movement against the exclusion of the poor and the powerless from the mainstream political system, it also lobby for their inclusion (Green and Griffith 2002:54; see also Varadarajan 2006). Although, both the Scheduled Caste and the non-Scheduled Caste labourers have been relegated to the periphery by the forces of the market in the process of globalisation, it did not affect them uniformly. In fact, the process of globalisation has never been uniform in its effects across all regions or economies. Since globalisation is an uneven process, it “…generates a distinctive geography of inclusion and exclusion such that the notion of a worldwide or global economy is less geographically inclusive than that of a planetary or universal economy” (McGrew 2005:210). The way the process of globalisation affects the life of a Scheduled Caste worker differs significantly from that of the non-Scheduled Caste one. In a caste-based society, social rank plays an important role in determining one's economic status. In a system of graded social hierarchy, lower social status and economic backwardness seems to be coterminous. The process of globalisation has further aggravated this vicious equation of social and economic backwardness. The logic of economic globalisation favours the rich, who can invest and multiply capital. Such favoured rich are mostly found among the so-called traditional ‘upper castes’ who have monopolised land and other economic sources in the country. It has made them prominent in the newly carved out vast private space of the open market. In other words, it has led to an alliance between the forces of the market and the upper castes -- much to the disadvantage of the marginal and the lower castes. Since the implementation of the new economic reforms, the numbers of jobs have been reduced in the public sector. This, in turn, has led to an increase in unemployment and poverty. The increase in unemployment among the Dalits is most discernible in relation to the constitutional space that signifies their current mode of existence. This space basically comprise (sic) the provision of reservations in the state-aided educational institutions and in the employment of government and public sector companies. Despite the dismal record of their implementation, there is no doubt that these provision (sic) have played a crucial role in the advancement and progress of dalits. Globalisation has variously constrained this space without affecting any change in the constitution (Teltumbde 2004:5). In the first decade of the new economic reforms in India, the ratio of both unemployment and poverty increased from 28 per cent in 1989 to 48 per cent in 1992. Since Dalits constitute the bulk of the poor and unemployed, they have suffered most (Jogdand 2002). Their chances of acquiring jobs in the high-tech industry at home as well as in the multinational corporations have been getting curtailed since the beginning of the process of globalisation in India. The system of primary and elementary education in the rural and urban settings has been subverted almost totally. Since, majority of the rich upper caste send their wards to the private/convent/public schools, government schools have been reduced into dysfunctional centres of learning for the poor Dalits. It is simply out of the reach of the matriculates of such neglected government schools, where hardly any infrastructure and teachers are available, to be able to compete for admission in the country’s prestigious Information Technology (IT) or management schools. Moreover, since the background of a majority of Dalit undergraduates is in Arts and Humanities, it becomes difficult for them to meet the job requirements of the multinational corporations. Even if some of the Dalits aspire to compete in the technology driven new job market, it would be, perhaps, out of their reach to acquire the requisite qualifications at exorbitant rates from the various engineering and management institutes. “The increasing cost of education on the one hand and drying up of the motivation for education because of no-job prospects created by globalisation on the other is fast proving the reservation in education meaningless” (Teltumbde 2004:5). Moreover, another way through which the process of globalization has been affecting the lives of the Dalits rather more severely is the transformation of their traditional hereditary occupations into lucrative profit seeking competitive avenues where they find themselves incapable of competing with the so called upper castes who until very recently used to consider such professions as polluting (Kumar 2002: 81-82). In other words, when the occupations of sewage disposal, scavenging and raw hides were performed in the Jajmani (hereditary system of asymmetrical reciprocity and patronage between landlords and occupational experts) set up bereft of profit incentive, Dalits were condemned and forced to take them up. But when the same occupations became profit-generating businesses, Dalits find themselves at odd in their own tested fields. It is in this context that the process of globalization perpetuates the system of caste and inequality albeit in a new form. Instead of liberating them, it further pins them down. Earlier they were excluded and were condemned as shudras because of their closeness to the sewages, now it excludes them by way of defeating them in the profit oriented open market system of the neo-liberal economy. In fact, this market is open only for those who have the capital to play the profit game on the chessboard of its unrestrained competition. In this new profit driven game of the process of globalization, Dalits – normally starved of capital – stand disqualified. Yet another way through which the process of globalization severely affects the lives of the Dalits is the accentuation of the phenomenon of their exclusion from land. Significant parts of the vast majority of them who live in villages are landless labourers. Only a small number of them are cultivators with marginal holdings (Teltumbde 2004:5). The large-scale landlessness on the part of the Dalits led to their dependence on the upper caste land owning communities, which in turn further deepened the caste based inequalities with the burden of asymmetrical class structures. The neo-liberal economic policies adopted under the regimes of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation widen the already existing caste and class divisions between the Dalits and the dominant castes. As Harish K Puri argues, The most worrying issue now related to the economic future of the lower castes and lower class people in the context of the ruling ideas and forces of neo-liberalism because it spelled a virtual paradigm shift. The state’s welfare role of positive intervention, which was the mainstay of Nehruvian and Ambedkarite framework, had given way to market rationality (Puri 2006:11). In fact, the forces of neo-liberal economy have not only scuttled the post-1945 Keynesianism or social democratic agenda of state social welfare, they also substituted it with corporate farming to cater to the requirements of the global market, and Special Economic Zones to serve the purpose of the mega commercial centers under the control of the privileged few. Thus to put the above discussion succinctly, it can be said that the contemporary process of globalisation severely deprives the Dalits of the advantages of the new opportunities made available in the realm of capital and precludes the benefits of the hard earned constitutional affirmative action. However, it does not mean that poverty is found only in the developing countries and among them within the lower strata of the society. Poverty also afflicts those who live in the developed world and also those who enjoy higher social status in the developing world. To quote Dipak Basu, “In the United States, about 12 million people are homeless, one third of the people cannot afford primary health care, 20 per cent of the people are below poverty line, about 23 per cent of the people are illiterate with no security of either job or of life” (Basu 2002). However, it makes a lot of difference to be a poor and at the same living in a developing world and also belonging to a low caste. For instance, in Punjab, a poor Scheduled Caste landless agricultural labourer is distinguished from a poor but dominant caste landless agricultural labourer (landless peasant labourer) by the fact that he, along with his being economically deprived, also suffers from social exclusion. In the case of a Scheduled Caste landless agricultural worker, his being deprived of land is to a large extent related with his social rank. This, in turn, also gets reflected in his economic status. In a broader context, the landlessness of the Scheduled Caste community has serious implications on its economic life. It has generally been observed that during a clash over wages between an agriculturist on the one hand, and landless but dominant caste agricultural labourers and landless Scheduled Caste agricultural labourers on the other, the agriculturalist imposes social boycott on the landless Scheduled Caste agricultural labourers in order to deny them an access to his green fields for fodder as well as to answer the call of nature in a rural setting. This does not apply on an equal scale to the landless dominant caste agricultural labourers, who lag behind their peer group economically, but enjoy a similar status socially. “Amusingly enough, the agricultural labourers belonging to higher castes treated their fellow labourers of Scheduled Castes as social untouchables” (Chowdhry 1976: 464-65). The prestige system of social status also affects the lives of the members of the poor upper castes in its own unique way. The upper caste poor have often found that their so called higher social status turns out to be a hurdle in their way to take up those jobs which are usually undertaken by the lower caste people. The spate of suicides among the farmers in Punjab is a case in point. These hapless farmers were Jats by caste, which is a dominant caste in Punjab similar to the Brahmins in other parts of the country. Whatever be the reasons behind the act of their suicides, social prestige was an important factor in almost all the cases. Though in majority of the suicide cases the burden of indebtedness was the obvious factor, it was not the sole factor. The factor that pushed them to such a disastrous act was that they did not dare to face the blot of bankruptcy in a social system in which they enjoy a higher rank (Iyer and Manick 2000; Bhalla et al. 1998; Shergill 1998; Sidhu 1991; Singh 1993; for an excellent review of agrarian crisis and suicides by farmers in different states in India see also Ahlawat 2003; Lochan and Rajiv 2006; Suri 2006; Jodhka 2006; Mishra 2006a; Mishra 2006b; Rao and Suri 2006; Mohanakumar and Sharma 2006; Sridhar2006). In the following section an attempt has been made to delineate the meaning of globalisation with reference to capital and labour.
I Globalisation, as referred to in the beginning of the paper, has been embellished with various meanings. It has been projected as a 20th century wonder, which contains immense potentialities for the elimination of poverty, hunger and disease. The European Commission in its Annual Economic Report for 1997 defined globalisation “as the process by which markets and production in different countries are becoming increasingly interdependent due to the dynamics of trade in goods and services and flows of capital and technology. It is not a new phenomenon but the continuation of developments that have been in train for some considerable time” (European Commission 1997: 45). In this context, it is primarily associated with ‘a process of intensifying worldwide economic integration’ (McGrew 2005:209). However, this political-economy-centric view of globalisation when juxtaposed with the one grounded within the wider social science literature presents a more complex picture. It is also projected as an era of universalisation and intensification of transnational flows of images, people, commodities and capital (Deshpande 2003:152). Though the process of globalisation is often referred to interchangeably with the notions of liberalisation, internationalisation, universalisation, modernisation, westernisation, Americanisation, de-territorialisation, or supra-territorialisation, none of these terms, argues Scholte, captures its distinctive features (McGrew 2005: 209; see also Scholte 2000; Scott 1997:5; Abdelal and Segal 2007). Looked at through the prisms of political economy, cultural theory, political analysis, international relations, and urban sociology, globalisation resonates differently in the different contexts (Nasstrom 2003). Given the complex nature of its subject matter, the phenomenon of globalisation is prone to give rise to methodological disputes about its apt analysis (Rosenberg 1995). “The recent discussion within sociology and political science has been careful to distinguish globalisation theory from the theory of modernisation on the one hand and from accounts of colonialism on the other. The concept of globalisation should not act simply as a synonym for a new phase of modernisation or for Westernisation,” (Scott 1997:3). The theory of globalisation needs to be saved from being slipped into a trap of reductionist or determinist that “ ... appear to reduce divergent aspects of a complex process to some set of fundamental causes or to some single societal sub-system (e.g., the economy)” (Scott 1997:3). Globalisation needs to be understood as a multi-dimensional, rather than singular, process and free from the disciplinary boundaries of a particular field. Equally important is to rescue it from the prevailing myths and rhetoric about its inevitability and irresistibility (Scott 1997:1; McGrew 2005:3). New v/s the Old Globalisation is not a new phenomenon, as it is claimed widely. In effect, it is the replication of the political and economic imperialism of the 19th century (Harshe 2002: 1407). Moreover, in the 19th century the world was more integrated than is the case today (Gilpin 2001:3). Equally important is to critically analyse the objectives of the process of globalisation. The process of globalisation is not something that has come into operation on its own as a beneficial God gifted natural source. It is, perhaps, a well planned and well regulated project aimed at building a uniformed global market for the benefit of a limited number of individuals/corporations. Its sole aim is to accumulate capital, which by its very logic creates dens of poverty, disease and squalor in the periphery, and wealth in the core of the globalising world (Wade 2005: 291-316). In order to comprehend such diabolic posture of the phenomenon of globalisation, it needs to be distinguished as an ideology and as a paradigm. As an ideology, globalisation creates a sense of false consciousness in the periphery. It makes its appearance as beneficial through various popularly projected images. At the same time, it also builds up the logic to subdue any opposition to its upward surgence. It emphasises that poverty and low economic growth were the results of keeping oneself out of the reach of globalisation. As a paradigm, globalisation provides an epistemological outlook for the understanding of the world. This epistemological outlook has assigned the prefix New to the already existing asymmetrical world. The fact, however, is that it is not the existential world that has really become new or newly ordered under the spill of globalisation. What the paradigm of globalisation was able to do under the prefix New is that it has succeeded in projecting the same old world as new in a particular way that favours capital over labour. This paradigm of presenting the old world in the form of something new emanates from a perspective, held by the privileged few, to scan the uneven structures of the existing world in such a manner as to project them as ‘new’, ‘ordered’, ‘global’, interdependent’, and ‘homogeneous. Such a paradigmatic approach in looking at the so-called changing trajectories of the world has more to do with the ‘concrete processes’ of economy and politics rather than with its projected abstract realities. However, in the domain of political economy, it is not always essential to stick to apparent realities. On the contrary, the projected realities have usually been taken as given; realities that favour capital and the metropolis and deprive labour and the periphery. Such realities in fact are not generally acceptable realities at all. (Explain more clearly) It is so because they emboss the fabricated and artificial homogeneous world on the real and the existing asymmetrical world. This is another way of subjugating the marginal, the ‘other’. The marginalised are subjugated through the mirage of the promised /imagined new world. The imagined world has been made more real than the actual real world is. The real world is not the one where we live, but the one we have been told about. The panacea to all our maladies, we are told, lies in getting assimilated quickly into this New world –the globalising one. It is also said that poverty, failure of the State, and ethnic insurgencies in Asia, Africa and elsewhere are not the outcome of the specific factors grounded in the colonial structures of these continents or in their own current specific domestic situations, but because of their refusal to open themselves to the currents of the global market. In the words of Abdul-Raheem, “Western ideologues insist that we must imagine and organise society in accordance with their values and systems without providing space to any alternative ideology. In this hegemonic scheme, the rest of us are seen as non-starters, or at best late comers, whose only destiny is to follow the path already trodden by the West" (Abdul-Raheem 2000:15). There is nothing sacred about regimes and institutions as sermonised by the Western think tanks. What democracy, globalisation, free market, and multilateral institutions mean to them does not equally apply to the poor South (Manchanda 1997). Nor, is the rich North seriously interested in the genuine proliferation of the principles of liberalism and democracy. In the name of democracy and free market economy regimes, the continents of Asia, Africa and South America were rather further subjected to what Abdul-Raheem characterised as "recolonisation" (Abdul-Raheem 2000: 15). No doubt the world has changed, but the governing principles of world politics have not. It is Realpolitik, which still regulates the transactions among the states and also among the non-state managers of today's world. The emergence of the process of globalisation and the triumph of free market over the planned economy do not imply that politics based on the pursuance of national interest and power has given place to communitarianism and welfare. It is claimed that “[t]he process of globalisation has produced much that is new in the world's economy and politics, but it has not changed the basic ways capitalism operates. Nor has it aided the cause of either peace or prosperity” (Magdoff 1992: 39). Contrary to the repetitive claims, the post-Cold War world is very much the same intransient world of power games and shrewd diplomacy. The so-called New world is the old place where one has to move cautiously in the given hard-core choices, and in an environment of no permanent friends and foes. How does one then understand the United States’ support to the non-democratic Sheikhdom in the Middle East and to the authoritarian states of South East Asia, whereas United States, itself, stands for democracy not only within but internationally also. Democracy as a value is not as important as its use for the promotion of national interests. "It seems that the West only prefers a ‘democratic’ outcome that does not, as the Americans say, upset the applecart" (Abdul-Raheem, 2000: 19). To quote Abdul-Raheem further “[t]hat means democracy with a western veto” (Ibid.). Any democratic process that helps raise genuine political aspirations, finds no support from the West if such a process is likely to adversely affect the status of the West. Thus, in order to qualify for a democratic status one needs to fulfill the expectations of the West. It does not matter much even if you are a despot or a dictator provided you do not create any difficulties for the West. “In the Southeast Asia, lack of democracy and gross abuse of human rights do not seem to have affected the growth of capitalism, whereas the Gulf States with their abundant oil wealth can dispense with democracy and human rights altogether. Otherwise, why would America and the so-called Allied powers have gone to war in the Gulf only to restore feudal family rule” (Ibid: 18). Given a choice between democracy and promotion of national interest, the latter gets a priority over the former. That is what the law of power politics advocates. It needs to be taken with a pinch of salt that free trade is the most important natural torchbearer of the 21st century. The moot point is who does the process of globalisation favour? How does globalisation operate in an unequal and anarchic world? What safeguards, if any, are available to the ex-colonial societies and the marginalised to defend themselves against the system of domination, embedded in the logic of a world structured on the principles of power politics? In fact, the process of globalisation legitimises “the right of the advanced capitalist states and their citizens to dominate the rest of humanity. It affirms the right of the capital to move around the globe but restricts the freedom of labour (people). Those who desire a global humanity must, therefore, struggle to humanise the globe, such that free human beings can live, work or settle anywhere they wish?" (Ibid.) It is in this context that we need to take up the issue of the process of globalisation in the context of the marginalised in the periphery. Rampant violence, narcotic terrorism, mounting debts, political apathy and indolence, subordination to market, controlled print and electronic media, ecological devastation, marginalisation of the State, nepotism, corruption, the ever increasing rise in the internal civil strife leading to mass killings, and exodus are a few issues of crucial concern relating to the marginalised in the periphery.
II The purpose of the paper is not to prescribe solutions, but to problematise the impact of the process of globalisation on the societies in the periphery and the marginalised. The term periphery is used here to reflect on the weaker sections of the under-developed and developing countries of the Afro-Asian world. However, even in this very part of the asymmetrical world, the interest of the miniscule minority converges more conveniently with that of the core of the rich North rather than with that of their fellow beings in the poor South. Thus, it is in this context that the term periphery needs to be taken into consideration while evaluating the impact of globalisation on the socio-economic and political life of the marginal people divided on caste/class lines within the non-Western world. The purpose here is not to provide a blueprint, but to problematise the issue. What we often deal with in the name of globalisation is less of a phenomenon and more of an ideology and a paradigm. Such an aberration always keeps one away from understanding the real causes of poverty and exploitation induced by the process of globalisation in the periphery. Capital, Labour and Globalisation The system of globalisation is not accountable to the people whom it affects. Since the State, which draws sustenance and legitimacy from the citizens in the geographically determined boundaries, begins fading in the face of the surging forces of globalisation, it often finds excuses to exempt itself from its legal responsibility towards the betterment of its populace, especially the marginalised. Public policy, based on the State supported social protection, gave way to deregulation, privatisation, cuts in state’s social welfare schemes (e.g. Public Distribution System [PDS] in India), restrictions on labour unions, flexible labour markets, strict laws and quotas restricting immigration to the countries of the North. Such anti-people policies are not only encountered by the people of the developing world, the political establishments in the countries of the developed world equally adhere to them. In this context, it is appropriate to reproduce here what Amiya Kumar Bagchi says: The rules of the game in the globalisation process changed drastically from the 1970s. The European and United States’ capitalists thought that they must teach the workers a lesson – they must break the trade unions and put an end to the post-war welfare states of Europe. Margaret Thatcher, the British Prime Minister, was a pioneer in this worker bashing. Around 1985, I happened to be at a meeting with Sir Alan Walters, one of the chief economic advisors of Margaret Thatcher. We were talking about the failure of big strikes in Britain during Thatcher’s regime. Sir Alan said roughly, “I told Margaret Thatcher, kick the workers, and go on kicking them till they are down, and kick them even when they are down” … A similar strategy was pursued by the United States Government during Ronald Regan’s presidency. As a result, the real wages of an average American worker today is lower than it was in 1979 (Bagchi 2004: 7). Such anti-labour policies do not only characterise the governments in Europe and the United States, but even the governments and left-of-centre parties in Japan, and Australia have been talking the same language (Wade 2005:292). Furthermore, through the international financial mechanism of the Multilateral Economic Organisations (MEOs) like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the World Trade Organisation (WTO), these anti-labour policies are extended to the domestic realms of the developing countries (Ibid). The most startling case of non-accountability on the part of the forces of globalisation is the callousness on the part of the Union Carbide with regard to the victims of the Bhopal Gas tragedy. According to Harish K Puri, Much of the information is hidden from the public. Inspection of the plant by the Indian government officials was evidently casual; and most likely corrupt. And we know the cost. Over 10,000 were killed by the leakage of the deadly gas; over 200,000 were injured and sick, including those born later. Invariably most of these who became victims happened to come from the low class caste workers and their families. And, even after 22 years of struggle for justice the culprits have not been punished (Puri 2006:15). The question of justice, of late, has come up as the most important contentious issue of globalisation. Some of the leading exponents of the process of globalising have now started echoing the concern that “… in its failure to deliver a more just global economic order, globalisation may hold within it the seeds of its own demise” (Higgott 2000:131). James Wolfenson, President of the World Bank reiterated in his address to the Board of Governors of the Bank in October 1998 that in the absence of ‘greater equity and social justice’ no amount of money could provide us financial stability. Ethan Kapstein expressed similar views when he underlined the fact that any economic system widely viewed as unjust will not endure for long. Of course, these views are not new. They were put forward much earlier when the present system of globalisation was not even conceived of. Adam Smith put on record in his ‘Wealth of Nations’ that no society could survive or flourish if great numbers lived in poverty (quoted in Higgott 2000:131). If the contemporary process of globalisation sincerely aims at strengthening the need for strong governance, then contrary to the pro-capital policies of its neo-liberal lobbying centres of London and Washington, it has to remove all “barriers to the movement of people in search of work” and to make stringent efforts towards the formation of “a single market for both capital and labour” (Jha 1999). The system of justice, which we are familiar with, is understood within the “Westphalien cartography of clear lines and stable identities”(ibid). Westphalien justice presumes a stable political order, based on legitimate political authority, having a clearly demarcated social space. Since with the concretisation of the process of globalisation, the territorial boundaries of politics are becoming unbundled, to borrow Ruggie's evocative phrase, it becomes inevitable that the conceptual images of justice conceived in the boundaries of politics fixed by territoriality will become similarly unbundled (ibid). The conventional accounts of justice have failed to address the changing nature of social bond. The system of globalisation is not a social bond at all. It is a blatant system of profit seeking and self-propagation. It has not been brought out by a contractarian agreement among the multitudes of large number of so-called fading states. The system of globalisation has come to be confronted by the people of Afro-Asian world who have yet to become citizens in real terms (Ram 2001). Before the people of impoverished states could win the battle of their subsistence against their native monopoliser and rent-seeker, they have suddenly been exposed to the big doyens over whom they have no system of pressure. In an era of consumer driven globalisation, it is not in the fitness of things to quote Karl Marx who even after one and a half-century sounds fresh in his contents and analysis of the economic structure of the society. To quote him in detail: The bourgeoisie has through its exploitation of the world market given a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country. To the great chagrin of Reactionists, it has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilised nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw material, but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of the globe. In place of the old wants, satisfied by the productions of the country, we find new wants, requiring for their satisfaction, the products of distant lands and climes. In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence of nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual production. The intellectual creations of individual nations become common property. National one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible, and from the numerous national and local literatures, there arises a world literature (Marx and Engels 1848:37-38). This system of global relations of production, of exchange and of property has become, to quote Marx again, “…like the sorcerer, who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells" (ibid: 39). However, what makes Marx’s analysis of the ever-widening reach of the bourgeoisie society unique is its class character articulated by him in the following words: In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed – a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce, and consequently exposed to all the vicissitudes of competition, to all the fluctuations of the market (Marx and Engels 1848:40). Thus, the formation and augmentation of capital is the essential condition for the existence and furtherance of the bourgeoisie that lay at the foundation of the process of globalisation. The current process of globalisation does not paint a different picture. The basic rules of its grammar remain the same (see also Omvedt 2001). However, what makes a difference, as far as the status of the labour versus capital is concerned is that, to quote Marx once again, The modern labourer, on the contrary, instead of rising with the progress of industry, sinks deeper and deeper below the conditions of existence of his own class. He becomes a pauper, and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth (ibid: 45). He (labourer), in fact, has been completely abandoned in the labyrinth of uselessness. Globalisation thrives on services and information technology. Agricultural, industry and manufacturing are no longer important avenues for it. Finance capital, capital generated through stock markets and capital earned on the use of information industry has ultimately replaced the capital generated by the labour. This, in turn, has further led to marginalisation of the already marginalised section of the society (Patnaik 2004). History played a trick with Marx. He expected revolution on the basis of his capital analysis of the bourgeoisie society in the industrial world of Germany or England, and not in an agriculturally dominated society of Russia. However due to Lenin’s intervention, the revolution in Russia became successful at that time. For Marx, proletariats contain the force of transformation of the bourgeoisie society into socialism. In the manifesto of the Communist Party, he clearly mentioned that the struggle of the proletariat with the bourgeoisie is at first a national struggle. “The proletariat of each country must, of course, first of all settle matters with its own bourgeoisie”. Since capital knows no boundaries and expands further and further, in search of its expansion it becomes imperative for the proletariats of all the countries to get united to oppose the march of such capital. The manifesto ends with the following words “The proletarians have nothing to loose but their chains. They have a world to win”. In reality, workers belonging to different countries failed to emerge into a global body. On the other hand, capital succeeded in forging a global network. The success of the capital has been celebrated with the end of the history thesis. In the absence of a radical alternative to the arbitrariness of the global capital, the future of mankind seems to zero-in on barbarism. One may venture into formulating that in the face of ‘the end of history’ emerges ‘the clash of civilisations’. Efforts are being made now at the global level to tackle the crisis of communal global terrorism. However, such types of symptoms of the disease are quite early signs of the maturing evil of accumulation of capital on the one hand, and poverty on the other. From the Seattle protests of 1999 to the annual conclaves of the World Social Forum, surcharged street demonstrations and shouting of anti globalisation slogans represent deep smouldering embers of the severe crisis that the process of globalisation faces today.
III To manage the crisis of globalisation, efforts are now being made, since the second half of 1997, to politically legitimise, democratise and socialise the process of globalisation (Higgott 2000:133). Is it feasible, at least theoretically, to socialise the process of globalisation? To socialise globalisation seems to be tantamount to saying to socialise capital. However, capital by its very nature intrinsically defies any such attempts. It is basically based on the process of capital generation through the appropriation of surplus values generated by the labourers. And, the grammar of capitalism tells us that a surplus value is the value of labour that is denied to a labourer. Thus, the capital and the utopia of its equal distribution are basically antithetical to each other. In the words of Scott, “… not only is globalisation thought not to be tied to any substantive notion of the ‘Good Society’, it may, according to its critics, even preclude any discussion of what such a society might look like” (Scott 1997:6). According to the Human Development Report 1997 published by United Nations Development Programme, The greatest benefits of globalisation have been garnered by a fortunate few. A rising tide of wealth is supposed to lift all boats, but some are more seaworthy than others. The yachts and ocean liners are rising in response to new opportunities, but many rafts and rowboats are taking on water- and some are sinking. The ratio of global trade to Gross Domestic Product has been rising over the past decade, but it has been falling for 44 developing countries, with more than a billion people. The least developed countries, with 10 per cent of the world's people, have only 0.3 per cent of world trade – half their share of two decades ago.
The metaphor of the rising tide lifting all boats fails to take off when applied in the context of the effect of the globalisation on the developing countries. In the developing world the tides of the neo-liberal economy had ended up knocking over some of the smaller boats. “It has increased the divide between the rich and the poor countries and further widened the gap between the rich and the poor in the Third World countries. The number of poor in Africa has doubled”, said Nobel Laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz in a lecture on Making Globalisation Work in Chennai recently (Stiglitz 2007). According to the 1999 version of the Human Development Report, the income gap ratio between the 20 per cent of the world's population in the richest countries and the 20 per cent in the poorest grew from 30:1 in 1960 to 60:1 in 1990 and 74:1 in 1995. The poorest 20 per cent of the world's population account for only one per cent of the total global Gross Domestic Product and 40 per cent of the world's population lives in absolute poverty. The number of people with income of less than $ 1 a day increased by almost 100 million to 1.3 billion between 1987 and 1993 (Reddy 1999). In the past 18 years, the per capita income has declined in more than 100 countries. In a large number of countries, life expectancy is still 40 years. The external debt burden of the developing countries totals $2.2 trillion, according to 1999 estimates. Of this, two-thirds is public debt. The net material worth of the world's 200 richest persons increased from $ 440 billion to more than one trillion in just four years: 1994-1998 (Oommen 1999). “Global inequalities in income have increased alarmingly in the last hundred years. More than 30,000 children die every day from preventable diseases. Some 90 million children are excluded from primary education. About 790 million people are hungry and 1.2 billion live on less than one dollar a day” (Raj 2002). The above statistics shows that the global spread of capital failed to reduce the contradictions between the poor and the rich nations. “Although a handful of third world countries, benefiting from the globalisation process, have made noteworthy progress in industrialisation and trade, the overall gap between core and periphery nations has kept on widening” (Magdoff 1992:2). The exploitative and inequitable stance of globalisation became factually clear in the last few years. The Washington Consensus (WC) based neo-liberal project of globalisation came under severe attack on its durability in the wake of the financial crisis that hit Asia in the second half of 1997 and soon spread to Latin America and Russia in early 1998 (Williamson 2003). Another factor that accounted amongst the significant sources of backlash against the unbridled nature of globalisation project was the failure of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to establish the multilateral argument on investment. ‘The battle of Seattle’ was yet another factor that jostled globalisation from its very roots (Higgott 2000:135-136). Along with these events of crisis revelation of globalisation, another factor which affected the ever surging march of globalisation is “the development of a perception that global liberalisation brings with it increased inequality” (ibid: 136). The above cited events and perceptions led to the lowering of the image of globalisation from its status of inevitability to its self-demise. This also led to the end of the orthodox Washington Consensus backed model of globalisation, based on economic liberalisation that dominated the period between 1980 and 1990, and resulted in the emergence of a 'Post Washington Consensus' (ibid: 137). The Post Washington Consensus is a response to the challenges to the process of globalisation. It aims at rectifying the pitfalls of economic liberalisation by introducing the system of global governance (for an excellent review see Parkash and Jeffrey [eds.] 1999), what Stephen Gill calls a constitution for global capitalism (quoted in Higgott 2000:137). The project of globalisation of 1980s and the early 1990s did not have any place for ethics. It was based on purely the free market principle of profit and maximising self-interest. “The idea is that capitalism, left to itself, can recover from any crisis and any public intervention can only make things worse. Thus any public actions are nothing but distortions of the system which must be minimised” (Basu 2002). The Post Washington Consensus model has been trying to bring ethical dimensions into the theory of globalisation. The attempt on the part of Post Washington Consensus to bring ethical content into the theory of globalisation was not merely a tactical move to forestall the simmering revolt against economic liberalisation. According to Edwards “there is genuine concern for bringing in recognition of the importance of tackling ethical questions of justice, fairness and inequality” (Higgott 2000:137). The Post Washington Consensus, thus, distinguished itself from the Washington Consensus by the concepts of civil society, social capital, capacity building, governance and transparency, a new international economic architecture, institution building and safety-nets as against the Washington Consensus mantras of liberalisation, deregularisation and privatisation. Taming the Neo-liberal Economy In the absence of an egalitarian alternative to the structures of domination, the human face of globalisation based on global governance makes no difference for the marginalised who continue to be afflicted in the gas chambers of gender, caste and class. The market has failed to liberate them. Moreover, it has further pinned them down. They are not welcomed in the sphere of market as equal partners of profit. In other words, the market too practices untouchability, albeit in a different form. They feel alienated in their own world of creation. How strong can the global market be, in the long run? It will not survive until and unless the question of the marginals is addressed amicably. As Abdelal and Segal argue, “The challenge is to sell the benefits of ongoing globalisation to a wary public, to make sure those benefits materialise, and then to ensure they are distributed more equitably” (Abdelal and Segal 2007:104-5). In fact, the question of equitable distribution of resources is closely related with the issue of the immediate and amicable redressal of the cause of the marginals and the socially excluded (Green and Griffith 2002: 68). They need not be provided with only cheap articles of provision of minimal use as have been popularly done in some Indian states. What seems to be essential is to empower them, to enhance their buying capacity in the real sense of the term, to dismantle the structures of economic and social dominations, and to remove the stresses of globalisation. “If we are not concerned of the stresses of globalisation, ideological counter-currents will emerge. Globalisation is not a bed of roses. There is a need to be watchful, always,” warned Singapore Foreign Affairs Minister George Tong-Boon Yeo at the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) Partnership Summit in Bangalore (The Hindu, March 19, 2007). In other words, a balance needs to be created between the forces of market and the principles of social justice. It is in this context that the contemporary process of globalisation, the crisis of governance, and the issue of empowerment of the marginalised pose a common and serious challenge to the policy makers which have to be addressed amicably at the earliest. Acknowledgement Different versions of this paper were presented at seminars: Globalization and The Underprivileged: Perceptions, Fears and Consequences, organized by Department of Sociology, Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut; Globalisation and Political Economy of North-West India, organized by Department of Political Science, SGGS College, Chandigarh; Globalisation, Social Institutions and Values, organized by Dev Samaj College for Women, Chandigarh; Justice to Weaker Section of the Society, organized by Chandigarh People’s Welfare Forum and Punjab and Haryana High Court Advocates’ Committee on Judicial Accountability, Chandigarh; and at a Workshop, The Empowerment of Dalits and Women, organized by Ambedkar Center, Department of Sociology, P. U. Chandigarh. Comments and observations received from the scholars helped significantly in improving the arguments presented in this paper. My thanks to Harish K Puri, Paramjit Singh Judge, and K.C. Sulekh discussions with who helped me further revise the draft. I am equally grateful to Seema, Sahaj and Daksh who facilitated my long sittings in the study away from home. However, for any fault or error, the responsibility lies entirely with the author. References:- A Report from Mumbai: Resistance 2004 and the World Social Forum. 2004: Revolutionary Worker # 1232, March, <http://rwor.org/a/1232/awtw ns-mumbai.htm> (January 26 2007).
Asia Gears Up Against: Globalisation, http://www.cpiml.org/libration/year_2003/ february/report3.htm, (January 26 2007. Abdelal, Raw and Segal Adam. 2007: Has Globalization Passed its Peak? Foreign Affairs, 86(1), 103-114 Abdul-Raheem, Tajudeen. 2000: Globalisation and Recolonisation, Seminar, 490 (June), 14-20. Ahlawat, S. R. 2003: Sociology of Agrarian Crises: Peasant Suicides and Emerging Challenges, Man and Development, 25(30), 97-110 Allott, Phillip. 2000: Globalization From Above: Actualizing The Ideal Through Law, Review of International Studies, 26(Special Issue), 61-79 Armstrong, David. 1998: Globalization And Social State, Review of international Studies, 24, 461-478 Bagchi, Amiya Kumar. 2004: Rich Men’s Globalization: How Do Women and the Poor Fare? In Malini Bhattacharya, (Ed), Globalization: Perspectives in Women’s Studies, New Delhi: Tulika Books Basu, Dipak. 2002: Global Questions –II, The Stateman, February 19 Bhalla et al. 1998: Suicides in Rural Punjab, Chandigarh: IDC. Bhattacharya, Malini (Ed). 2004: Globalization: Perspectives in Women’s Studies, New Delhi: Tulika Books. Birchfield, Vicki. 2005: Jose Bove and the Globalisation Countermovement in France and Beyond: A Polanyian Interpretation, Review of International Studies, 31(3), 581-98 Castles, S., and Miller, M. 2002: The Age of Global Migration, London: Palgrave Chiswick, B. R., and Hatton, T. J. 2003: International Migration and Integration of Labor Markets. In M. D. Bordo, A. M. Taylor, and J. G. Williamson (Ed0, Globalization in Historical Perspective, Chicago: Chicago University Press Chowdhry, Prem. 1976: Rural Relations Prevailing in the Punjab at the Times of Enactment of the so called ‘Golden Laws’ or Agrarian Legislation of the Late thirties, The Punjab Past and Present, X (II), 461-80 Deshpande, S. 2003: Contemporary India: A Sociological View, New Delhi: Viking. European Commission. 1997: Annual Economic Report for 1997, European Economy, 63, Brussels: EC. Firebaugh, G. 2003: The New Geography of Global Income Inequality, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Galbraith, J. R. 2002: A Perfect Crime: Inequality in an Age of Globalization. Daedalus, 131(1), 11-25 Gilpin, R. 2001: Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Green, Duncan and Griffith, Matthew. 2002: Globalization and its Discontents, International Affairs, 78(1), 49-68 Harshe, Rajan. 2002: Marxism, Capitalism, Globalisation, Economic and Political Weekly, 37(15), April 13-19, 1407-12 Held, D., Goldblatt, D. and Perration, J. 1999: Transformation: Politics, Economics and Culture, Cambridge: Polity Press. Hersh, Jacques, and Burn, Ellen. 2000: Globalisation and the Communist Manifesto, Economic and Political Weekly, 35(3), January 15-21,105-8 Higgott, Richard. 2000: Contested Globalization: The Changing Context And Normative Challenges, Review of International Studies, 26 (Special Issue), 131-153 Hoogvelt, A. 2001: Globalization and the Post-Colonial World, Basingstoke: Palgrave. Iyer, K. Gopal and Manick, Mehar Singh: Indebtedness, Impoverishment and Suicides in Rural Punjab, Delhi: Indian Publishers. Jha, Prem Shankar. 1999: The Dark Side of Globalisation –II, The Hindu, February 13 Jodhka, Surinder S. 2006: Beyond ‘Crises’: Rethinking Contemporary Punjab Agriculture, , Economic and Political Weekly, XLI (16), April 22-28, 1530-37. Jogdand, P. G. 2002: Globalization and Dalits, Social Action, 52(1) Kapstein, Ethan. 2000: Winners And Losers In The Global Economy, International Organization, 54(2), 359-84 Krugman, Paul. 1999: The Return Of Depression Economics, London: The Allen Lane Press. ____________: 1995:Dutch Tulips And Emerging Markets, Foreign Affairs, 14(1), 28-29, Kumar, Vivek. 2002: Globalisation and Empowerment of Dalits in India, Guru Nank Journal of Sociology, 23(1), 77-86 Lindert, P. H., and Williamson, J. G. 2003: Does Globalization Make the World More Unequal? In M. D. Bordo, A. M. Taylor, and J. G. Williamson (Eds), Globalization in Historical Perspective, Chicago: Chicago University Press
Lochan, Meeta and Rajiv, 2006: Farmers Suicide: Facts and Possible Policy Interventions, Pune: Yashwantrao Chavan Academy of Development Administration. Madhopuri, Balbir. 2004: Chhangia Rukh (Autobiography), Chandigarh: Lokgeet Parkashan. Magdoff, Harry. 1992: Globalization: To What End? Kharagpur: Cornerstone Publications, Originally published in Ralph Miliband and Leo Panitch (Eds), Socialist Register 1992: New World Order? , New York: Monthly Review Press, Parts appeared in Monthly Review, February and March 1992, 43(9&10) Manchanda, Rita. 1997: Globalization on the side of Civil Society, Times of India, 31 (December) McGrew, Anthony. 2005: The Logics of Globalization. In John Ravenhill (Ed), Global Political Economy, Oxford: OUP Marx, Karl and Engels Frederick. 1848 (1986): Manifesto of The Communist Party, Moscow: Progress Publishers. Mishra, Srijit. 2006: Farmers’ Suicides in Maharashtra, Economic and Political Weekly, XLI (16), April 22-28, 1538-45 …………….. 2006: Suicide Mortality Rates across States of India, 1975-2001: A Statistical Note, Economic and Political Weekly, XLI (16), April 22-28, 1566-69 Mohanakumar,S, and Sharma, R. K. 2006: Analysis of Farmers Suicide in Kerala, Economic and Political Weekly, XLI (16), April 22-28, 1553-1558 Moliner, Christine. 2004: Between Invisibility and Dignity: India’s Dalit and Globalisation, March 25 www.openDemocracy.net Nasstrom, Sofia. 2003: What Globalization Overshadows, Political Theory, 31(6), 808-34 Omvedt, Gail. 2001: Marx and Globalisation – I&II, The Hindu, March 1&2 Oommen, T.K. 1999: Deepening Disparities: Working Out A New Global Ethic, Times Of India, December 9 O’Rourke, K. H., and Williamson, J. G. 2000: Globalization and History, Boston: MIT Press. Patnaik, Prabhat. 2004: The Meaning of Contemporary Globalisation, New Age Weekly, 52(36), September 5-11, 8-10&14 Pauly, W. Louis. 2005: The Political Economy of International Financial Crises. In John Ravenhill (Ed), Global Political Economy, Oxford: OUP Prakash, Aseem and Hart, Jeffrey (eds.). 1999: Globalisation and Governance, London and New York: Routledge. Puri, Harish K. 2006: The Lower Caste and the Globalisation-imperative: Rethinking the National Project, Journal of Political Science (Jalandhar), 2(2), 5-16 Raj, Felix. 2002: Global Disparities – I, The Stateman, March 1 Ram, Ronki. 2001: Afro-Asian Dialogue: Understanding Globalization In The Periphery, Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(1), 83-9 Rangarajan, C. 2003: Globalisation: Concept & Concerns –I&II, The Hindu, January 1&2 Rao, P Narasimha and Suri, K C. 2006: Dimensions of Agrarian Distress in Andhra Pradesh, Economic and Political Weekly, XLI (16), April 22-28, 1546-52 Reddy, B. P. Jeevan. 1999: The Perils of Globalisation – II, The Hindu, January 21 Rosenberg, J. 2000: The Follies of Globalization Theory, London: Verso. Ruggie, John G. 1993: Territoriality And Beyond: Problematizing Modernity In International Relations, International Organisation, 47(1), 139-74 Scholte, J. A. 2000: Globalization: A Critical Introduction, Basingstoke: Palgrave. Scott, Alan. 1997: Introduction – Globalization: Social Process or Political Rhetoric? In Alan Scott (ED), The Limits of Globalization: Cases and Arguments, London an d New York: Rutledge Shergill, H. S. 1998: Rural Credit and Indebtedness in Punjab, Chandigarh: IDC Sidhu, H. S. 1991: Agricultural Development and Rural Labour: A case Study of Punjab and Haryana, New Delhi: Concept. Silver, B. J. 2003: Forces of Labor: Workers’ Movements and Globalization Since 1870, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Singh, Sukhpal. 1993: Poverty and Indebtedness among Weaker Sections in Punjab, Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Patiala: Punjabi University. Sivaraman, Mythily. 2000: Women and Globalisation, The Hindu, October 17 Pradesh, Economic and Political Weekly, XLI (16), April 22-28, 1559-65 Stiglitz, Joseph. 1998: Towards A New Paradigm For Development: Strategies, Policies and Processes, The 1998 Prebisch Lecture, Geneva, UNCTAD, 19 October http://www. Worldbank.org/html/etme/jssp 101998.htm …………… 2007:Development is about Transforming Lives, Not Just Economies, Making Globalisation Work (lecture), Chennai, The Hindu, January 5 Suri, K C. 2006: Political Economy of Agrarian Distress, Economic and Political Weekly, XLI (16), April 22-28, 1523-29. Teltumbde, Anil. 2004: Calamitous Impact of Globalisation on Have Nots, New Age Weekly, 52(13), March 28-April 3, 5 United Nations. 1999. Human Development Report, New York: Oxford University Press. Varadarajan, Siddharath. 2006: Manmohan Calls for “Inclusive Globalisation”, The Hindu, October12 Wade, Robert Hunter. 2005: Globalization, Poverty, and Inequality. In John Ravenhill (Ed), Global Political Economy, Oxford: OUP Williamson, John (Ed.). 1990: Latin American Adjustment, How Much Has Changed? Washington: Institute For International Economics. 2003: The Washington Consensus and Beyond, Economic and Political Weekly, 38(15), April 12-18, 1475-81
POSTED ON JULY 22, 2007 |
SOCIAL CATASTROPHE IN THE MAKING: RELIGION, DERAS AND DALITS IN PUNJAB The recent violent clashes between the followers of Dera Sacha Sauda (established in 1948 with its headquarters in Sirsa, Haryana) and different groups of Akalis as well as a spate of other social conflicts between Jats and Dalits in the state seem to have acquired an utmost importance in the current political history of Punjab. The importance of such conflicts surpases the much talked about ‘short-term politics of revenge’ and throws a critical light on their much deeper socio-religious roots steeped into the so-called casteless Sikh society in Punjab. On the one hand, it lay bare the dormant structures of social discrimination that permeates the fabric of the Sikh society and on the other, points towards the neo-conservative Sikhs’ anxiety of dwindling Sikh-Khalsa identity in the state. In fact, the recent Akalis-Dera Sacha Sauda row over the mimicking of iconography of the tenth Master of the Sikhs by Gurmeet Ram Raheem Singh, the current head of the Dera, seems much to do with the prevalence of the doctrinally rejected system of caste hierarchy among the Sikhs. Since majority of the followers of various Sacha Sauda type Deras come from the dispossessed sections of the society who at one point of time had embraced Sikhism in the hope of elevating their social status and fortune, their almost exodus from Sikhism towards alternative socio-spiritual space provided by such Deras invite the hostility of the clerics of the mainstream established religious order who interpret it as a serious challenge to the dwindling Sikh-Khalsa identity. Moreover, the frequent politicisation of the Deras makes the issue further complicated. The persistent attempts made by the various Sikh organizations during the recent Akalis-Dera crisis to win over their disgruntled Dalit Sikh followers are a clear case in point. This paper intends to problematise the recent Akalis-Dera crisis by contextualising it into the larger Dalit question in Punjab and its implications for the religion based politics of the state. Punjab has the distinction of housing the country’s largest proportion of Scheduled Castes (SCs) population (29 per cent) belonging to different religions and castes. There are total of 38 castes among the SCs in the state. Out of these 38 castes, two belong to Sikh religion. The SCs who belong to Sikh religion are known as Mazhabi and Ramdasis or Ramdasia Sikhs. Mazhabis were Chuhras (sweepers) who converted first to Islam from Hinduism, and later to Sikhism. Ramdasias were Julahas (weavers) before their conversion to Sikhism. Ramdasia Sikhs are mostly confined to the Doaba and Malwa sub-regions of the state and majority of them are Sahajdhari Sikhs – those who do not observe the Khalsa outward manifestation. Kanshi Ram, founder of the Bhaujan Samaj Party (BSP), was a Ramdasia Sikh. Ramdasias are also known as Khalsa Biradar. Mazhabis, the devout Sikhs, are mostly concentrated in the Majha (between Beas ans Ravi Rivers) and Malwa (south of the Sutlej River, also known as Cis-Sutlej during the British period) sub-regions of Punjab – the battlefield of recent violent clashes between the Akalis and the Premis (literally lovers’, a traditional metaphor for devotees of the Sufi and Bhakti orders) of the Dera Sacha Sauda. It is also in the Malwa sub-region, the heartland of the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD), that the Dera Sacha Sauda turned the tables on the SAD by helping the beleagured congress win 37 out of its total 65 seats in the recent vidhan Sabha elections. In terms of numbers, Mazhabis are the most numerous Sikh caste among the SCs of Punjab (who account for 30.7 per cent of the total SC population in the state as per 19991 census), followed by Chamars (25.8 per cent), Ad Dharmis (15.9 per cent), Balmikis – Chuhras and Bhangis (11.1 per cent) to mention only the major castes. In the 2001 census their population was recorded at just a little over 22 lakhs (31 cent of the total SC population of the state). They are also the most deprived section of the SCs of Punjab with the lowest literacy rate (42.3 per cent) and majority of them are agricultural workers (52.2 per cent). Many of them have also been working as Siris (attached labourer). Though the Siri system has ceased to exist in the state, but in the Malwa region some of the Mazhabis still work as Siris. According to a field-based study of 26 villages in Malwa region, 21 had Dalits working as Siris. Mazhabis embraced Sikhism in the hope of gaining social equality, but even in Sikhism the spectre of untouchability kept on haunting them. They “were forbidden to enter the Golden Temple for worship; their offering of karah prasad was not accepted and the Sikhs denied them access to public well and other utilities”. As late as 1920s they were not allowed to go beyond the fourth step in the Golden Temple and members of the upper castes were instructed not to mix with them. Evidence of untouchability against Dalit Sikhs is vividly reflected in a number of resolutions adopted by the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC) from 1926-1933. Although the Sikh reformers of the late 19th and early 20th centuries preached in favour of removing untouchability, no strenuous efforts were made in that direction. Social opprobrium continues to afflict the Mazhabis and other Dalits. Some of them were of the opinion that Jats treat them as badly in the Gurdwaras as they treated them in their farmlands. In spite of their meticulous observance of Sikh religious principles, they are not considered equal by the dominant Sikh caste, which refused to associate with them, even in religious ceremonies. They continued to face discrimination in the Gurdwaras and are cremated on separate cremation grounds along with their Hindu counterparts. Even in some villages the land meant for the cremation grounds in the Shamlat (common land under the control of Panchayats) have been grabbed by the upper castes. They were also denied proportionate representation in various religious and local social structures in the state. It is the Jats, the dominant peasant caste in the state, who hegemonised over all the Sikh organizations: Gurdwaras, Sikh Deras, SGPC, and SAD. Dalits are often heard of complaining that if Jats refused to consider them equal even after deaths by denying them the right to burn in a common cremation ground then why should they expect from us that we should continue with their mainstream (read Sikh) religion. This has forced the Dalit Sikhs to establish separate Gurdwaras that strengthened the already existing caste divisions among the Sikhs. Caste divisions get further reinforced in the segregated lives that Dalits live in away from the mainstream villages. Their settlements are contemptuously called Thhattis or Chamarlees. Thhattis or Chamarlees are invariably located on the side toward which the sewerage of villages flows. Madanjeet Singh observes “Notwithstanding the media images of Punjab’s prosperity, the region has become the ghetto of caste apartheid”. It is against this backdrop of blatant social exclusion that a large number of Dalits have been veering away from the mainstream Sikh religion and enrolling themselves into various forms of Deras in Punjab whose success partly “lies in the relationship between Dalit resistance and religious rebellion”. Of late, the Dalits of Punjab have mustered enough strength to challenge the dominant caste and its exclusive hold on the mainstream Sikhism. At least from among the Mazhabis and Ramdasias Sikhs, “a strand of thought has begun to emerge that rebels against the exclusionist and reactionary tendencies that have continued to linger contrary to the mission and ideas of the gurus”. In fact, it was the Mazhabis and Ramdasias who constituted the core of the ‘Bhaniarawala phenomenon’ and the ‘Talhan crisis’ respectively. Again it was the Mazhabis and Ramdasias Sikhs of the Malwa region of the Punjab who figured most in the Sacha Sauda crisis recently. Another probable cause behind the large-scale Dalit followings of the Deras in Punjab could be the absence of a strong Dalit movement of the sort of the famous Ad Dharm led by legendary Babu Mangoo Ram Mugowalia during the first half of the 20th century. Had the Ad Dharm movement continued in full swing, it could have curtailed the swift flow of the Dalits towards the mushrooming growth of the Deras in Punjab? In fact, it could have even precluded the emergence of such a large number of Deras. In the absence of a strong Dalit movement and with the emergence of caste structures within the Sikh organizations despite the clear Panthic strictures against it, Dalits were but helpless to seek refuge in those organistions and Deras that promise them social equality and dignity. However, the phenomenon of Deras is not new to Punjab. Rather it was as old as the very process of the evolution of the Sikh faith. Different sects and Deras that emerged at different intervals during the evolution of the mainstream Sikh religion were primarily the outcome of the disgruntled and unsuccessful attempts of the fake claimants to the title of Guru. Bidhi Chand, the dissenter, made first such an attempt during the Guru-period (1552-1574) of third Guru, Amar Dass. He formed the Handalis sect, instituted the worship of Niranjan, ‘the bright God’ and declared himself as the Prophet or Handal. The Handalis endulged in anti-Panthic activities and collaborated with “Muslims in the destruction of Sikh properties and documents. They were penalized and dispossessed by Ranjit Singh, the first Maharajah of the Sikh Empire”. During the fifth Guru-period of Arjan Dev (1581-1606), Dhirmaliye and Mine sects were organized in opposition to the main religious Sikh body and they established their Deras along the Sutlej River. These sects were led by no else a person than by the elder brother (Prithi Chand) of Guru Arjan Dev himself, who also claimed to be Guru. Massandis was another sect that also cropped up during the Guruship of Arjan Dev. The Massandis (from the Masand exogamous gotra of the Khatri trading caste) were personal agents of Guru Arjan who he employed for collecting the offerings for the annual assembly of Sikhs. Later on when they indulged in the anti-Panthic activities, the Guru denounced them publicly. The descendants of Ram Rai, son of the Guru Har Rai (1644-1661), also organized a sect known as Ramraiyas during the Gurus-period. They dissented against the main body of the Sikhs, built a Dera at Dehra Dun (Uttar Pradesh) and attributed Guruship to Ram Rai. Apart from these early sects and Deras of the Gurus times, there were many more sects and Deras that cropped up at different intervals on the long and tortuous journey of the consolidification of the Sikh religion. Some of the more prominent among them were Nanakpanthis, Udasis, Sewapanthis, Nirmalas and the Nihangs also known as Akalis or Shahids. What distinguished the contemporary Deras from their counterparts during the Guruship period of the ten Masters is that in the case of the former their founders were/are not related to the Gurus of the mainstream Sikh body nor they claim Guruship over and above the ten Masters. Even in the recent case of Dera Sacha Sauda crisis, its chief had to render a written apology for mimicking the iconography of the tenth Master. However, one factor that seems to draw a similarity between the earlier and the contempopary Derasd is the presence of the institution of Human Guruship in all of them that goes against the very basic spirit and tenets of mainstream Sikhism. According to a latest study conducted by the Desh Sewak, a daily published from Chandigarh, there would be more than 9 thousand of such Deras in the total 12 thousand villages of Punjab. Among them the most popular Deras are of Radha Soamis sect, Sacha Sauda, Nirankaris, Namdharis, Divya Jyoti Sansthan, Bhaniarawala, and Ravidasis. Almost all of them have their branches in all the districts of the state and in other states of the country as well. Some of them are very popular among the Punjabi Diasporas and have overseas branches in almost all the continents of the world. These Deras claim to be only spiritual organizations and deny formulating any new religion. They said to believe in the oneness of God and do not adhere to a particular faith, though the heads of some of them (Sacha Sauda and Radha Soamis) wear turban and has long beard in the Sikh style. People belonging to various religions like Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Christianity etc can become their members and they need not to relinquish their previous religious identities. Despite their non-sectarian claims some of these Deras are adhered to along caste lines. There is a close connection between the memerbership of some of them and the particular caste groups. “When some caste members are persuaded to join a particular sect offering certain advantages, usually in terms of upward mobility, others of the same caste may also follow. In some cases, of course, the factor of hereditary descent or assumed hereditary descent from the founder of the sect is involved. Namdharis, Bhaniarawala and Ravidasis Deras are of special interest in that they mostly draw on the affliations of those caste groups to which the founders of these sects belonged. In the case of the Namdharis, it was primarily members of the Ramgharia caste, actually a section of the Tarkhan Sikh caste, who were part of this sect. Bhaniarawala Deras are strongholds of the Mazhabis. In the Ravidasis Deras, again a very large majority of their followers belonged to the two main castes – Chamars and Ad Dharmis – of the Dalits in Punjab. There is a general impression that 80 per cent of the people of Punjab are affiliated with one or the other type of Deras. These Deras can be categorised into Sikh and non-Sikh ones. The non-Sikh Deras (like Sacha Sauda, Radha Soamis, Divya Joyti, Nirankaris, Bhaniarawala) enjoy a large number of followings among the Dalits [SCs and Other Backward Castes (OBCs)] in the state. Thereby, these Deras are also called Dalit Deras. About 70 per cent followers of Sacha Sauda are Dalits. Among its upper caste devotees a large number come from landless farmers or small time cultivators and shopkeepers who feel alienated by the powerful and moneyed leaders of Sikh organizations such as the SGPC. Among the followers of the Radha Soamis sect the estimated strength of the Dalits is more than 50 per cent and majority of them hail from Dalit concentrated districts of Jalandhar, Kapurthala, Nawanshahr, and Hoshiarpur of the Doaba sub-region of Punjab. Similarly among the Deras of the Divya Jyoti Sansthan headed by Ashutosh the participation of the Dalits is much more in comparison to that of the upper castes. The vast majority of the followers of Nirankaris also come from the non-Jats city dwellers castes. Namdhari Deras attract a large number of its followers from the Ramgarhia community – originally Tarkhan (carpenter) caste, a Backward Caste in Punjab. As far as Jats are concerned majority of them are the followers of Sikh Deras.It is generally believed that almost all the Sikh Deras are headed invariably by Jat Sikhs. It is rare that the head of a Sikh Dera would be a non-Jat Sikh. Even if there would be one he could not be a Dalit at all. At most Dalit Sikhs participation in Sikh Deras is confined only to the narration of the Sikhs’ sacred texts and performing of Kirtan (musical rendering of sacred hymns). Those who perform Kirtan are known as Raagis, and the professional narrators of the sacred texts who read it in a stylized manner are popularly known as Granthis. Majority of the Raagis and Granthis are Dalit Sikhs. Very few Jat Sikhs take up such professions. Bhai Mardana, a Marassi (lower caste), used to play the rabab (musical instrument) for Guru Nanak, the first Master of the founder of the Sikh faith. In the Sikh Deras, Sikh code of coduct is strictly followed and only Gurubani of Guru Granth Sahib is recited. Whereas in the non-Sikh Deras though Gurubani from Guru Granth Sahib is recited but at the same time other sacred texts are also referred to. In non-Sikh Deras idol worship and devotion towards human Guru is not an anathema like that in Sikh theology. It is precisely due to the presence of such non-Sikh traditions (human Guruship) in such Deras that the phenomenon of non-Sikh Deras came to be known what Meeta and Rajivlochan call ‘alternate guru movement in Punjab’. This ‘alternate guru movement in Punjab’ with its ‘loose syncretistic practices’ throws a formidable challenge to Sikh-Khalsa identity separate from the Hindu. For the neo-conservative Sikhs the Sikh-Khalsa identity has always been under a challenge and is particularly locked in an existential struggle with its two main adversaries: modernity and apostasy. Modernity is considered to be corrupting the young Sikhs who become lackadaisical in their observance of the Khalsa principles advocated by the tenth Master. Though Bhindranwala tried to assert the Sikh-Khalsa identity by taking up cudgel with a dissident sect of the Nirankaris and preaching hatred against the Hindus, but that could not preclude the move of the Dalits towards non-Sikh Deras. These Deras, in fact, pose a more serious challenge to the mainstream Sikhism. It is argued that Dalit Sikhs’ desertion of the Panth and their entry into various non-Sikh Deras is directly related to the over all control of Jats on the various Panthic organizations. Since all the important Sikh/Panthic organizations are under the conrol of the Jats and they are adamant not to share their management with Dalits, Dalits were forced to build their own separate religious organizations or to take refuge in non-Sikh Deras in the state. The followings of these Deras seem to far exceed that of the Golden Temple-based clerical establishment. It is in this context that confrontration between Deras and the mainstream Sikhism assumes great significance. These Deras, in fact, represent the disillusions of the dispossessed who at one point of time in their life embraced Sikhism in order to escape the taint of untouchability that was adhered to them in the Hindu social order. However, since their conversion into Sikhism failed to liberate them from the scar of the untouchabilty, they turn towards no-Sikh Deras that offer them perhaps better place. In other words the entry of Dalit Sikhs into various non-Sikh Deras in Punjab represent their social dissent and disillusionment with the Sikh religion Their social dissent propels them to seek a sense of personal worth by getting enrolled into one or other of such Deras. The dynamics of dissent and seeking personal worth through affliations with the Deras is what that made these Deras very popular and consequently brought them into steep confrontation with the long established mainstream Sikh religion in Punjab. In a recent case of confrontation between the Akalis and the Premis of the Dera Sacha Sauda, the Akalis tried to suppress the dissent through the use of violence and with the help of the state machinery. The Akalis also tried to win back some of their lost followers to the Dera Sacha Sauda, as most newspapers have reported, through forceful re-coversion. But social dissent cannot be simply wiped out either by re-conversion or by the sheer use of force legitimate or otherwise. Forceful suppression of social dissent rather turns it more aggressive. The very Sikh religion is a case in point. It rose in opposition to the rotten evils of caste and gender discrimination, and mindless religious persecution. The dispossessed soon joined its ranks. Untold atrocities against the Gurus and their followers failed to dampen its spirit. Instead, it got further strengthened. However, of late the evil of caste system against which it launched a tirade became its achilles’ heel. The sheen of its egalitarian agenda started becoming dim. It is at this juncture that the non-Sikh Deras enters into socio-religious territories of Punjab. They took on the same agenda of egalitarianism rather more vigorously that used to be an integral part of Sikhism in its pre Misl period. The promise of true egalitarianism pushed both Hindu and Sikh Dalits towards these Deras who feel alienated by the apartheid that pervaded rural Punjab. Since majority of their followers belonged to Dalits of different nomenclatures, these Deras came to be identified alongwith the traditional caste divisions in the state. It seems that all the non-Sikh deras are known as Dalit Deras and the Sikh Deras are called Jat Deras. Thus, it is safe to say that caste underscores the very composition of the various Sikh as well as non- Sikh Deras in Punjab. Thus the real bone of contention in the recent clashes between Akalis of various nomenclatures and the Premis of the Dera Sacha Sauda in Punjab is not just over religion, but caste, which exploded the myth of casteless Sikh society in the state on the one hand and challenged the hegemony of the Sikh-Khalsa identity on the other. The violent clashes in Punjab are more about identity confrontation between Jats (a former marginal community that has successfully overcomed its lower social status) and Dalits (a contemporary marginal community that failed miserably to do the same). They, in fact, reveal what the Dalits seems to have been struggling for over the last few decades in the contemporary Punjab, probably used to bother the Jats also earlier in the state in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. However, what makes the case of the Jats as an ex-marginal community rather different from that of the Dalits was their being a clean Shudra and free from the taint of untouchability. On the contrary, Dalits were known as unclean shudras whose very touch and sigh were considered to be polluting precisely because of their occupational closeness to the polluting articles. Another factor that might have helped the Jats to overcome their lower status was their corporate social mobility affected through their group conversion into Sikh religion. Moreover yet another factor that might have helped them improve their social status was the absence of sharp contradictions between them and the then upper caste community of the Khatris in the state. Khatris, unlike Jats in the case of social mobility of Dalits, did not oppose the Jats in their attempts towards upward social mobility. On the contrary, the impoving socio-economic position of the Jats perhaps suited Khatris the most in their commercial interests. However, in contemporary Punjab Dalits find themselves in quite different situation from that of the Jats duing the formative period of their social mobility. First of all, Dalits’ case differs clearly from that of the Jats in the sense that major gap lies between the ‘shudra’ status of the Dalits and that of the Jats. Though Jats were considered Shudras and lower Vaishyas in the medieval times, their social ranking was still much higher in comparision to that of the Dalits who were further pushed down on the social scale of the Hindu caste hierarchy. Jats were Shudras because of their profession, so were the Dalits. But the profession (agriculture) of the Jats was placed on a higher scale in the Hindu caste hierarchy in comparision to that of the Dalits, who were considered polluted as well as polluting because of their professional closeness to the carrion, human excreta and leatherwork. Enough references are available in the literatures on social mobility indicating the importance assigned to the profession of agriculture for uplifting the status of the marginalized groups. So much so that some of the Dalits opted for agricultural labour work in order to escape the social taint caused by their polutted professions. Thus inspite of the Jats and Dalits being both Shudras they belonged to two different status groups within the same broader category (Shudras) in the Hindu social hierarchy. The Jats of Punjab are primarily an agriculture community. There is no consensus among the scholars about their origins and social rankings. However, they were considered to be egalitarian in their social dealings among themselves. Social hierarchies were alien to them. So was the gender discrimination. They were neither artisans nor menials. Since they were primarily first pastoral and then agriculturalists, they cannot surely be clubbed together with the categories of the artisans and the menials who were distinctly characterized by the ancillary nature of their hereditary professions to agriculture. Jats were also known as pagans who fall beyond the pale of the Hindu religion. Their placement within the Varna system is also disputed. Since every profession that involves physical work is generally consigned into a lower status within the Brahminical Social Order (BSO), the profession of agriculture was not an exception. In fact, in the BSO polughing was considered to be below the status of the upper castes. An upper caste often prefers to die of starvation than to touch the plough that lowers his social status in the rigid caste hierarchy. The fourth Varna (the lowest), popularly known as Shudra, consisted primarily of the artisan and the menial castes. Similarly there is no doubt about the profile of the first (priest), second (soldiers), and the third (traders) Varnas. However, as far as Jats (agricultural caste) were concerned they were not clearly categorized in the Varna order. Their erstwhile social exclusion was based more on the unique social traditions and customs that they followed than on the polluting nature of their profession. Another factor that made the life of the Dalits further miserable was the fact that they were deprived of land ownership. So in an agrarian economy they were forced to depend for their livelihood by working on the land of some one else. That posited them in direct confrontation with the Jats – the dominant land owning caste in Punjab. Unlike the case of Jats versus Khatris in the eighteenth century, the Dalits in contemporary Punjab are entangled with the Jats in a face-to-face contradiction in the sector of agriculture. Their relationship with the Jats is that of landlords versus landless agricultural workers. Despite their largest proportion in the population of the state in the country (29 percent [2001 census]), they own just 2.34 percent share in the agricultural land, the lowest in the country. Their share in the trade, industry, financial sector, health, and religious establishments in the state is also almost negligible. It is in this context that the Jats (the landholders), and the Dalits (the landless agricultural workers) find themselves in a situation of direct confrontation. However, there are many Dalits in the state who have improved their economic conditions by dissociating from their caste occupations and distancing them from the profession of agriculture. They have strengthened their economic position through sheer hard work and enterprise. Although the constitutional affirmative action played an important role in the upliftment of the Dalits in general, the monopoly of the Punjabi Dalits of the leather business in the famous Boota Mandi in the Doaba sub-region of the state and their ventures abroad turned out to be of crucial importance in overcoming their economic hardships. Some of them have established their own small-scale servicing units [carpentry, barber, blacksmith shops etc. In addition, they have also been politicized to a large extant by the socio-political activities of the famous Ad Dharm movementand of the various Ravidass Deras (religious centers dedicated to the teachings and philosophy of Guru Ravidass). In this case they have not only improved their economic status, but have also liberated themselves from the subordination of the Jat landowners. Consequently, their improved economic circumstances propelled them to aspire for a commensurate social status, which they seek through their memberships of the alternate non-Sikh Deras. Thus armed with the weapon of improved economic conditions and sharpened social consciousness, the Dalits in Punjab mustered enough strength to ask for a concomitant rise in their social status. They also turn towards various Deras that help them in seeking new and respectable social identity they are terribaly in need of. However, the Jats interpreted such Dalit assertion as a challenge to their long established supremacy in the state and also to their Sikh-Khalsa identity that in turn sharpened the contradictions between them and the Dalits. This has led to a series of violent caste conflicts between the Dalits and the Jats in Punjab over the last few years. Such conflicts are in no way a manifestation of communalism in the state. They are, In fact, signs of emerging Dalit assertion, which has all the possibilities of snowballing into a serious violent conflict. POSTED ON JUNE 12, 2007
|
MAYAWATI AND THE SECOND SOCIO-CULTURAL
REVOLUTION IN UTTAR PARDESH Mayawati, the BSP supremo, sworn in as 40th Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh on May 13, 2007. This is the second socio-cultural revolution in the history of Uttar Pradesh where during the medieval Bhakti movement Guru Ravi Dass, an untouchable poet-saint of very high repute, convinced the Brahmins that it was not caste but ones deeds which are important. Brahmins and Rajput Kings prostrated before him and Ranis and Maharanis of the then rulers and the rulers themselves became his followers. It seems that history was repeating itself when Brahmins and Thakurs among others were touching the feet of BSP supremo Mayawati during the swearing-in ceremony of the new cabinet at Lucknow. Once again Mayawati has proved that hollow prestige based on birth when put on trial in the democratic court of social justice failed to stand any more. But proving that is much easier said than done. Guru Ravi Dass fought a relentless battle against his tormentors who were adopting all fair and foul tactics to prevent him from entering into the mainstream of the social space. He unleashed a frontal attack on the long tradition of social oppression and untouchability. He took the battle right into the capital of the Brahmanical Social Order (BSO) and lay bare its fraudulent social structure. He employed Bhakti (loving devotion) as a method of protest against social exclusion. In his Bhakti he laid emphasis on compassion for all and absolute faith in God. His method was very daring and noble. He choose to challenge his tormentors by adopting the iconography of their dress code as a symbol of revolt which was not only highly objectionable but was equally deadly for a Shudra of his times. He rejected all forms of religious rituals and sectarian formalities. He challenged the tyranny of Brahmins and defied them by wearing Dhoti (cloth wrapped around the waist), Janeue (sacred thread) and Tilak (sacred red mark on forehead) that were forbidden for the untouchables. Though he attired himself like an upper caste, he did not hide his caste. He continued with his hereditary occupation of making/mending shoes. While adopting the prohibited dress and symbols of the upper castes, and at the same time sticking to his hereditary occupation he, probably, tried to show how lower castes could achieve their human rights without compromising with their separate Dalit identity. His Bhakti method of social protest reflected the democratic and egalitarian traits of his social philosophy. When challenged in their own estate and even in their own fiefdom of Bhakti, Brahmins had no option but to participate in a debate on the shastras thrown open by the Kashi Naresh (King). As Chandrabhan Prasad argues, “Ravidas’s genius found no match. The pandits turned pale, bending before the saint in recognition of his greatness. The saint rode the royal chariot through the lanes of Kashi, the King standing by his side. That was the Dalits’ first war of independence. Kashi was secured. The cow belt Brahmins never recovered from the shock, and were forced to reconcile to the Dalits’ cerebral superiority”. History was repeated on May 13, 2007. The place was Lucknow, the current capital of power in UP. And the star of the battle was Mayawati. To be more precise this time the battle was not around the shastras but about the numbers in the game of electoral politics. To win in such a fierce modern battle is to prove ones metal. And more so when you have been fighting while sharing the chariot with the ones who were very recently sitting in your opposite camp. Mayawati did very well. She proved her metal and turned victorious. She has reinforced the ‘cerebral superiority’ of the Dalits once again. It is in this context that her grand success in the recently concluded assembly election in Uttar Pradesh can be considered as the second socio-cultural revolution in the heartland of the varnashram order. Mayawati has provided a single-party government after more than 16 years breaking the whirlpool of coalition politics in UP. In fact, Mayawati put an end to coalition politics and ushered into an era of "Dalit-Brahmin-Muslim-Thakur-Vaishya-Bhumihar-OBCs" sarvjan combined rule. This new form of "combined rule of sarvjan" under the leadership of the Dalits is certainly an advancement not only over the tight rope walk of the coalition system that India has been experiencing for the last many years, but also a new beginning of the coming of the marginalized into the center stage of power politics. Mayawati's Dalit-Brahmin thesis and her emphasis on "sarv samaj" coupled with the social engineering formula would facilitate in laying down parameters for the mitigation of the gap between what Baba Sahib Dr. Ambedkar said "political equality and social and economic inequality" in India. In other words, this new system of ‘sarvjan combined rule’ would certainly help in deepening of the roots of democracy in India and inculcating positive feelings among the downtrodden that they too matter in this land where they were for centuries kept socially excluded, politically marginalized and economically deprived. Now they feel encouraged to come forward not to plead or ask for favors because they were neglected but because they are able to provide leadership to safely steer the ship to its destination. It was vividly clear from the oath taking ceremony dais where Smt. Mayawati was occupying the front seat followed by Pandit S.C. Mishra, general secretary of BSP. Is it not really a revolution in Brahmin dominated social set-up in India where they have agreed to not only sit behind Dalits but also to touch their feet? Imagine this even a few years before! Mayawati is absolutely right when she said that behind her great victory lays the philosophy of Phule, Naryana Guru, Periyar, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, and Babu Kanshi Ram. In fact, it is she who tried to put this philosophy into action and translated it into reality. Whether the Savarnas were falling at the feet of Mayawati out of gratitude or of political expediency is not the point. The real point is that by putting the Brahmins and Thakurs in line and commanding respect, Mayawati has been able to evaporate the Laxman Rekha of Varnashramdharma. She has set the ball of self-respect and dignity of the so-called Avarnas rolling. She has brought the Savarnas and Avarnas on a single platform, of course, led by her. What is even more important is that she achieved all this through democratic way without firing a single shot. And people of all sorts (read castes) stood by her in her battle against social repression and jungle rule. In fact, this is not in any case less than a social revolution. This revolution needs to be replicated in other parts of the country too, if India really wants to shine as a world power in near future. If India wants to march ahead, social exclusion has to be ended first. Untouchability is not a problem of the Shudras only; it is a number one problem of the entire Indian society. It needs to be tackle immediately. Baba Sahib Dr. B.R. Ambedkar sounded a grave warning on November 25, 1949 in the Constituent Assembly on the completion of the Draft Constitution: “On the 26th January 1950, we are going to enter into a life of contradictions. In politics we will have equality and in social and economic life we will have inequality… We must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment or else those who suffer inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which this Assembly has so labouriously built up”. Mayawati has fired the first shot. The struggle has to continue. Posted on May 15th, 2007 BSP Supremo Mayawati sworn in as 40th Chief Minister |
On May 13, 2007 BSP supremo Mayawati sworn in as 40th Chief Minister of the State (UP) that is going to play a decisive role in the forth coming presidential election. She has privided a single-party government after more than 16 years breaking the whirlpool of coalition politics in UP. In fact, Mayawati put an end to coalition politics and ushered into an era of "Dalit-Brahmin-Muslim-Thakur-Vaishya-Bhumihar-OBCs" sarvjan combined rule. This new form of "combined rule of sarvjan" under the leadership of the Dalits is cetrtainly an advancement not only over the tight rope walk of the coalition system India has been experencing for the last many years, but also a new begining of the coming of the marginalized into the centre stage of power politics. Mayawati's Dalit-Brahmin thesis and her emphasis on "sarv samaj" combined with the social engineering formula would facilate in layingdown parameters for the mitigation of gap between what Baba Sahib Dr. Ambedkar said "political equality and social and economic inequality" in India. In other words, this new system of combined rule would certainly help in deepening of the roots of democracy in India and inculcatinig positive feelings among the downtrodden that they too matter in this land where they were for centuries kept socially excluded, politically marginalized and economically deprived. Now they feel incouraged to come forward not to plead or ask for favours because they were neglected but because they are able to provide leadership to safely steer the ship to its destination. It was vivdly clear from the oath taking ceremony dias where Smt. Mayawati was occupaying the front seat followed by Pandit S.C.Mishra, general secretary of BSP. Is it not really a revolution in Brahmin dominated social set-up in India where they have agreed to not only sit behind Dalits but also to touch their feet! Imagine this even a few years before! Here Mayawati is absolutely right when she said that behind all this the philosophy of Phule, Naryana Guru, Periyar, Dr. Ambedkar, and Babu Kanshi Ram has been playing the determinant role. And it is she who has put it into action and translated it into reality.
In her 49-member Ministry 19 Ministers are of cabinet rank, 21 ministers of state (independent charge)and 9 ministers of state. The caste composition of her cabinet is: three Brahmins, one Muslim, one Thakur, one Bhumihar, one Vaishya, four Scheduled Casdtes and eighy OBCs.Cabinet ministers are: Naseeruddin Siddiqui, Ramveer Upadhyaya, Inderajit Saroj, Lalji Verma, Thakur Jaiveer Singh, Sukhdev Rajbhar, Swami Prasad Maurya, Ved Ram Bhati, Laxmi Narain, Rakesh Dhar Tripathi, Babu Singh Kushwaha, Jai Narain Rai, Phagu Chauhan, Nakul Dubey, Daddoo Prasad, Narain Singh, Sudhir Goel, Ram Prasad Chaudhary and Dharam Singh Saini. We all wish her success in her endeavours, Ronki Ram (Dr.) Poted on May 13, 2007 |
RESURGENCE OF DALITS:
Dear All,DELHI IS NOT FAR Jai Bheem! Congratulations The victory of the BSP in UP has shown the way to power to those who were being denied for centuries. Power game has its own grammer. It seems the followers of Babu Kanshi Ram are now not too late to master it. BSP supremo, Mayawati has proved it. She has meticulously worked out the dynamics of number game. She has not only convinced her own people that united they win and divided they loose, but has also established her credentials among the dwijas who uptill very recently were opposed tooth and nail to the coming of Dalits in to the public sphere. What is even more important is that the people of UP are convinced that if any political party can provide them relief from the mounting atrocities of the erswhile establishment it is the BSP under the strong leadership of the Madam Mayawati. They reposed confidence in her leadership and brought her into power to bring rule of law as well as justice in the beleaguered state of UP. Many are keeping the fingers crossed as to how Madam Mayawati would be able to make a balance between the Dalit emancipatory agenda of the BSP and the political expedency of her power politics. It seems, given her acumen and dexterity in politics, she would be able to tell the world that Dalits are now come of age and that Delhi is not too far from them.Once again Congrats to all of you. Ronki Ram (Dr.), Posted on May 11th, 2007
|
SPECIAL ARTICLE ON 27TH DEATH ANNIVERSARY Babu Mangoo Ram, a renouned revolutionary and founder of the Ad Dharm movement in Punjab was born at Mugowal, a village in the district of Hoshiarpur, on 14th January 1886. His forefathers were practising the occupation of tanning raw hides. However, his father, Harnam Dass, had abandoned the traditional caste-based occupation of tanning and preparing hides, and taken up the profession of selling the tanned leather on commercial basis. Since the leather trade required the knowledge of English language to read the sale orders, he was eager to have Mangoo Ram receive education to free him from the begar (forced labour), which he had to do in lieu of English orders read for him by the upper caste literates. Initially, Mangoo Ram was taught by a village Sadhu (Saint), then after studying at different schools he joined a high school at Bajwara, a town few miles away from his home. Being a chamar, he had to sit separately from the other upper caste students. In fact, he used to take a gunny bag from his home for sitting in a segregated place outside the classroom. In 1905 Mangoo Ram left the high school to help his father in leather trade. For three years he helped his father develop leather trade into a thriving business. However, in 1909 he left for America to follow into the footsteps of his peer group in the Doaba region. Interestingly enough even in America Mangoo Ram had to work on the farms of a Punjabi Zamindar who had settled in California. In other words, even in America he had to experience the same relations of production as back home in India. How a shudra immigrant worker, who works on the land of an Indian upper caste landlord settled abroad, feels and experiences work conditions and its resultant relations of production is an altogether a separate question. However, while in California, Mangoo Ram came in close contact with the Ghadar Movement - a radical organisation aimed at liberating India from the British rule through armed insurrection. In fact, he participated in the weapon smuggling mission of the organisation. He was arrested and given the capital punishment but was saved from the death sentence by a chance as someone else in his name was executed. The news of his supposed death reached his village. According to the tradition of his community, his widow, named Piari married his elder brother. Mangoo Ram, on reaching India, remarried and had four sons from his second wife named Bishno. After his return from abroad where he spent as many as sixteen years, Mangoo Ram did not find any change in Indian society that was still infested with the disease of untouchability. He said While living abroad, said Mangoo Ram, I had forgotten about the hierarchy of high and low, and untouchability; and under this very wrong impression returned home in December 1925. The same misery of high and low, and untouchability, which I had left behind to go abroad, started afflicting again. I wrote about all this to my leader Lala Hardyal Ji that until and unless this disease is cured Hindustan could not be liberated. In accordance with his orders, a program was formulated in 1926 for the awakening and upliftment of Achhut qaum (untouchable community) of India. Having settled in his native village, he opened up a school for the lower caste children in the village. Initially, the school was opened up, temporarily in the garden of Risaldar Dhanpat Rai, a landlord of his village. Later on, Lamberdar Beeru Ram Sangha, another landlord of the same village, donated half-acre land for the purpose of formally opening up the school. The school had five teachers including Mangoo Ram. One of the teachers of the school was a Muslim, Walhi Mohammad and one was Brahmin, who was later on converted into a Shudra. The conversion ceremony comprised of an earthen pot (Douri), which contained water mingled with sugar balls (Patasha) and stirred with leather cutting tool (Rambi). Thus the prepared sweet water considered as holy was given to Brahmins to baptize them into Shudras (Interview with Chatter Sain, 27 April 2001). Now a days, the school land has been declared as Shamlat (common land), and no remnants of the building exist except the old dilapidated structure of the well meant for drinking water in the school. It was in that school that the first official meeting of the Ad Dharm movement was held on June 11-12, 1926. There is another version about the school that traced its origin to the support provided by the Arya Samaj. However, given his close association with the Ghadar movement in California, Mangoo Ram’s relationships with the Arya Samaj was not as close as that of Vasant Rai, Thakur Chand and Swami Shudranand. Moreover, his personal experience of being treated as an equal in America, particularly by his fellow Ghadarites, inculcated in him an intense desire and inspiration for equality and social justice. This led him to lay the foundation of the Ad Dharm movement to streamline the struggle against untouchability. Soon he emerged as a folk-hero of the dalits who started rallying around him, particularly in the dalit concentrated areas of the Doaba region. However, after a while the Ad Dharm organisation got factionalised resulting in a split in 1929 into two groups: one headed by Vasant Rai and the other by Mangoo Ram. There emerged two independent organisations: the Ad Dharm Mandal with its office in Jalandhar was headed by Mangoo Ram and the All Indian Ad Dharm Mandal with its headquarters in Lyalpur was headed by Vasant Rai. The All India Ad Dharm Mandal got disbanded and merged with the organisation led by Dr Ambedkar in 1933 and after some years the same fate fell on Ad Dharm of Mangoo Ram, who closed the office of the Ad Dharm Mandal and changed its name to Ravidass Mandal. However, close associates of the Ad Dharm movement contested this observation. They said that Ad Dharm Mandal was not changed into Ravidass Mandal. In fact, later on, Ravidass School was opened up in the premises of the Ad Dharm Mandal building. So it was Ravidass School, which merely came to occupy the space of the Ad Dharm Mandal building rather than its being taken over by Ravidass Mandal. (Interviews with: late Chanan Lal Manak, Jalandhar, May 29, 2001; K.C. Shenmar I.G. (P) Pb. (retd.) Chandigarh, April 28, 2001). The Vasant Rai group of the Ad Dharm Mandal was thoroughly soaked into the ideology of the Arya Samaj. In fact this group was lured back by the Arya Samaj. Although the Arya Samaj dominated section of Ad Dharm Mandal withdrew itself from the Mangoo Ram’s group in 1929, the latter played an active part in the politics of Punjab for a period of two decades from 1926 to 1952. Mangoo Ram set a clear agenda for the emancipation of the Dalits and their upliftment. The agenda was: restore their lost indigenous religion and provide them with a sense of self-respect and dignity. The method to achieve this agenda was: cultural transformation and spiritual regeneration. Mangoo Ram was not in favour of embracing any other existing religion. He was in favour of strengthening the Adi (the original) religion of the indigenous people of this country. His views on Hindu religion were very clear. He was of the opinion that since Dalits were not born Hindu where is the need to leave that religion and to embrace some other one. Mangoo Ram thought it appropriate to empower Dalits by carving out a separate Dalit identity on the basis of their indigenous religious strength (Ad Dharm). In the poster announcing the first annual meeting of Ad Dharm Movement, Mangoo Ram devoted the entire space to the hardships faced by the untouchables at the hands of the caste Hindus. He also made an appeal to the Achhuts to come together to chalk out a program for their liberation and upliftment while addressing the Chamars, Chuhras, Sansis, Bhanjhras, Bhils etc. as brothers, he said, We are the real inhabitants of this country and our religion is Ad Dharm. Hindu Qaum came from outside to deprive us of our country and enslave us. At one time we reigned over ‘Hind’. We are the progeny of kings; Hindus came down from Iran to Hind and destroyed our qaum. They deprived us of our property and rendered us nomadic. They razed down our forts and houses, and destroyed our history. We are seven Crores in numbers and are registered as Hindus in this country. Liberate the Adi race by separating these seven crores. They (Hindus) became lord and call us ‘others’. Our seven crore number enjoy no share at all. We reposed faith in Hindus and thus suffered a lot. Hindus turned out to be callous. Centuries ago Hindus suppressed us sever all ties with them. What justice we expect from those who are the butchers of Adi race. Time has come, be cautious, now the Government listens to appeals. With the support of sympathetic Government, come together to save the race. Send members to the Councils so that our qaum is strengthened again. British rule should remain forever. Make prayer before God. Except for this Government, no one is sympathetic towards us. Never consider us Hindus at all, remember that our religion is Ad Dharm. The way, the leaders of Ad Dharm chose to restore dignity and freedom to the untouchables was to completely detach them from Hinduism and to consolidate them into their own ancient religion - Ad Dharm - of which they had become oblivious during the age-old domination by the ‘alien Hindus’. In fact, the task of the revival of their ancient religion was not an easy one by virtue of the fact that during a long period of persecution at the hands of the Savarnas, the untouchables had forgotten their Gurus and other religious symbols. In fact they were never allowed to nurture an aspiration to have their own independent religion. They were condemned as profane and were declared unfit to have their own theology. Thus to revive Ad Dharm was tantamount to developing an altogether a new religion for the Achhuts. Mangoo Ram’s appeal that the Dalits were the real inhabitants of this land made an enormous psychological impact on the untouchables who were treated as, even inferior to animals in Indian society. The appeal inspired them to come out of their slumber and fight for their freedom and liberty. The Ad Dharm provided a theological podium to sustain and reinforce the new Dalit identity. For centuries, they were bereft of any identity and remained in the appendage of the hierarchically graded Hindu society. Before 1920’s, especially before the rise of Ad Dharm movement, the untouchables in Punjab hardly envisaged the idea of seeking a separate identity. The growing communal politics and resultant unrest within Punjab in the 1920’s coupled with the emergence of Dalit organisations in different parts of the country, offered them a good opportunity to carve out such an identity. In the pre-partition Punjab, untouchables constituted one-fourth of the total population. Since scheduled castes did not have their separate religion, they were being counted as Hindus. In a system of communal representation, Muslim leaders were thinking that the Achhuts, who were never considered as equal by the caste Hindus, should be separated from them and equally divided between the Hindus and Muslims. It was not only Muslims who alone had such an approach, even the Sikhs, Christians, and Hindus also wanted to absorb them into their respective religion for political benefits. In the absence of any other alternative open to them, a large number of the Achhuts of Punjab converted into Christianity (especially the chuhras of Sialkot and Gurdaspur), Sikhism (in Sialkot and Gurdaspur), and Islam (Rawalpindi, Multan and Lahore division). Consequently, the Hindus in the province had been reduced from 43.8% in 1881 to 30.2% in 1931 while the Sikhs increased from 8.2% to 14.3% and the Muslims from 40.6% to about 52% and in the British territory the population of the Hindus, the Sikhs and the Muslims in 1931 was 26.80%, 12.99% and 56.4% respectively (Census of India, 1931, Vol. xvii, Punjab Part i, p. 291). Obviously, it alarmed the Arya Samaj to put an end to the conversions of Achhuts lest it turned out as a political suicide for Hindus. Lala Lajpat Rai’s “Achhut Udhar Mandal” at Lahore, Swami Ganesh Dutt’s “Antyaj Udhar Mandal” at Lahore and Lala Devi Chand’s “Dayanad Dalit Udhar Mandal” at Hoshiarpur came up in response to these conversions. As a matter of fact, the Arya Samaj started Shuddhi campaign to bring the converted Achhuts back into the Hindu-fold. This also brought the Arya Samaj into confrontation with the Sikhs and the Muslims. “In a famous incident in 1900, Sikhs rebelled at the Arya Samaj’s practice of publicly shaving lower caste Sikhs and offering them Shuddhi”. It was at this stage that Ad Dharm entered into the volatile territories of communal politics in Punjab. The emancipatory project launched by Mangoo Ram inspired the lower castes to make efforts for their upliftment. Ad Dharm posited emphasis on the social equality of the Dalits and stressed on creating social and cultural awakening amog them. Ad Dharm movement aimed at securing a distinct identity for the dalits, independent both of the Hindu and Sikh religions. Sikhs and Hindus treated the dalits discriminately. But at times of counting their strategic strength they project the dalits as if they belonged to them. The central motif of the Ad Dharm movement was to highlight that untouchables constitute a qaum (Community), a distinct religious community similar to those of Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs, and that the qaum had existed from time immemorial On this account the Ad Dharm movement resembles the other Adi movements, which consider the low castes as the original inhabitants of India who had been subjugated by the Aryans. The Aryans, they allege came from outside and established their rule and made them subservient to them. The Ad Dharm movement aimed at making the dalits realise that they have three powers: Communal pride (Qaumiat), Religion (Mazhab) and Organisation (Majlis). All these three powers of the untouchables were lying buried under the burden of untouchability. Mangoo Ram, the founder of Ad Dharm movement exhorted the untouchables to come forward to assert for their rights through building on these three main sources of their power. During the 1931 census, Ad Dharm movement succeeded in registering a large number of low castes in Punjab as Ad Dharmis separate from Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. In the 1931 Punjab census, a total of 418,789 persons reported themselves as Ad Dharmis almost equal to that of the Christian population of the region. Since the center of the Ad Dharm movement was in Doaba region, nearly eighty percent of the lower castes of Jalandhar and Hoshiarpur districts reported themselves as Ad Dharmis (ibid.:77). It was for the first time in the history of lower castes that they had come forward to officially declare themselves as separate and independent of the Hindu, Sikh and Muslim religions. This was, perhaps, the beginning of the dalit assertion in North India. It got further impetus in the first election that took place in 1937 after the promulgation of the Government of India Act of 1935. Ad Dharm Mandal contested election in all the eight reserved seats and won all except one. In the 1945-46, Punjab Legislative Assembly elections on the eve of independence Ad Dharm also registered its presence by contesting in alliance with the Unionist Party. Mangoo Ram, the founder of Ad Dharm was one of the elected candidates. Ad Dharm movement was instrumental not only in helping the lower castes to get registered as a distinct religion in the 1931 census and providing them the platform to enter into the State Legislature, it also went a long way in bringing a cultural transformation in their life. In fact, Ad Dharm movement, as has been mentioned above, aimed at facilitating a cultural transformation in the life of lower castes that, under the impact of the centuries old system of degradation, had actually internalised a sense of being low and polluted. Mangoo Ram wanted to liberate them from such a state of mind and also to inculcate in them the feeling of dignity and self respect whereby they could start thinking about them as equal to the so-called twice-born people. Report of the Ad Dharm Mandal, 1926-1931 lists a number of moral principles and duties, which the followers of the Ad Dharm are required to adhere to for creating spiritual regeneration and cultural transformation in their lives. Among the most important moral principles and the duties mentioned in the report are: The basic principles listed in the Report are: (1) The essential teachings of the Ad Dharm will always be the same: no one can change them. They can stay alive and persist only through the help of a guru. (2) Every man and woman belongs to the faith, but they may not know it. To live without a guru is a sin. (3) A guru should be someone who truly and rightly knows the teachings of the previous masters. He should be able to distinguish between falsehood and truth. He should be able to bring peace and love within the community. (4) Everyone should be instructed by the lives of previous masters; progress comes from following the masters’ examples. The practices of previous masters should not be abandoned. This leads to progress. (5) There should not be any discrimination in regard to eating with other castes. (6) Ad Dharmis should abstain from theft, fraud, lies, dishonesty, looking at someone else’s wife with bad intentions, using anything which brings intoxication, gambling, and usurping other persons’ property or belongings. All of these things are against the law of nature and therefore the law of Ad Dharm. (7) Every Ad Dharmi has the duty to teach his children current knowledge and also to teach them to be obedient to the present king. (8) Every Ad Dharmi should read the Ad Prakash and act upon it. This is a foremost duty. (9) Ad Dharm does not believe in the caste system or any inferiority or superiority of this sort. (10) To learn and seek knowledge, and to learn and seek progress is compulsory for every man and woman. The twelve duties mentioned in the Report are as follows: (1) to publicize and propagate Ad Dharm. (2) To take pride in Ad Dharm. (3) To promote the use of name of the community and to use the red mark, this is its sign. (4) Ad Dharmis should try to retrieve any property of fellow Ad Dharmi that has been usurped. (5) We should distinguish among Hindus, Ad Dharmis, and other communities of India. (6)Those books, which have created the problem of untouchability and led to discrimination - books such as the Laws of Manu and other Shastras – should be completely boycotted and abandoned. (7) We should celebrate the festivals of our gurus and follow our faith to the utmost. (8) Abandon idolatry. (9) Receive education for ourselves and others in the brotherhood. (10) Boycott those who curse us as “untouchables” or discriminate against us. (11) Bring all demands of Ad Dharmis before the government. (12) Abandon expensive marriage and practice of child marriage. The fifty-six commandments included in the Report are: (1) Each Ad Dharmi should know everything about the faith. (2) For the betterment and salvation of one’s body – physical and spiritual – one should recite the word soham. (3) Each Ad Dharmi should remember Guru Dev for half an hour each morning or evening. (4) When Ad Dharmis meet, their greeting should be “jai Guru Dev.” (5) We should be true followers of the founders, Rishi Valmiki, Guru Ravi Das, Maharaj Kabir, and Bhagwan Sat Guru Nam Dev. (6) a guru is necessary, one who knows about previous gurus and has all the capabilities of being a guru. (7) The wife of a guru should be regarded as one’s mother, the guru’s daughter as one’s sister. (8) Devotion to one’s wife should be a part of one’s faith, for therein lies salvation. (9) Every Ad Dharmi should abstain from theft, fraud, lies, dishonesty, and usurping the property of others. (11) One should not cause someone else heartache. There is no worse sin than this. (12) Every Ad Dharmi should enthusiastically participate in Ad Dharmi festivals and rituals. (13) There should be equally great happiness at the birth of both boys and girls. (14) After the age of five, every boy and girl should be given proper religious teaching. (15) Extravagant expenses at weddings are useless. Every marriage should be conducted according to rituals of our tradition. (16) Ad Dharmis should marry only Ad Dharmis. To marry someone outside Ad Dharm is not legal, but if someone does marry an outsider, he or she should be brought into the faith. (17) All Ad Dharmis, both men and women, should be obedient to their parents. (18) After the death of both parents it is the duty of each Ad Dharmi to cook food and distribute it among the poor. (19) The dead should be cremated, except for those under the age of five, who should be buried. (20) Ad Dharmis do not follow any other law except their own. (21) In the Ad Dharm faith only one marriage is allowed, but a husband may marry after the death of his wife. Also, if the first wife does not bear children, the husband may take another wife, provided he has the consent of the first wife. If this happens, the first wife remains a legal wife, with all the rights she had before. (22) Ad Dharmis should marry their children to the Ad Dharmis of the surrounding areas. (23) A girl should be more than twelve years old at the time of the marriage. The boy should be four years older than the girl. (24) It is illegal to receive money for a bride; on the other hand, there should not be a dowry. Those who sell their daughters commit a very great sin. (25) Offerings and sacrifices for prayers should be given only to those holy men who are Ad Dharmi and who have shown themselves to follow Ad Dharmi principles religiously. (26) It is necessary for each Ad Dharmi to provide primary education to both boys and girls. (27) The girls should be educated especially in household work such as sewing and needlework. (28) Young girls and boys should not be sent out to cut grass and gather wood. (29) It is the duty of parents not to allow young widowed daughters to remain in their household, because a young widowed daughter is a cause of disgrace. (30) If an Ad Dharmi widow with children wants to hold a commemoration of her deceased husband, but cannot afford it, then the Ad Dharm Mandal of Jullundur and its members will help her. (31) It is not good to cry and beat oneself at a death or funeral. To do so is to anger Guru Dev. (32) Among the Ad Dharmis sons and daughters should receive an equal inheritance. (33) To eat the meat of a dead animal or bird is against the law of Ad Dharm. (34) To use wine or any other intoxicants is a sin, except in the case of sickness. (35) It is legal to eat food offered at noon – Ad Dharm marriages, but the food should be decent, and not leftovers. (36) Cleanliness is important. It guaranteed good health. (37) It is forbidden to practice idolatry and worship statues, and one should not believe in magic, ghosts, or anything of the sort. (38) All Ad Dharmis should forget notions of caste and untouchability and work toward the unity of all people in the world. (39) Each Ad Dharmi should help a fellow Ad Dharmi in need. (40) One Ad Dharmi must not work at a place where another Ad Dharmi works until the first Ad Dharmi has been paid his wages. (41) If Ad Dharmis enter into a dispute with one another, they should attempt to come to some agreement by themselves or within the community. If no agreement is accomplished, they should refer the case to the Ad Dharm Mandal, Jullundur, and the Executive Committee will take action. (42) Ad Dharmis should open shops and business in every village. (43) Every Ad Dharmi should be a missionary for the faith. (44) Ad Dharmis should call themselves such and register in the census as “Ad Dharmi”. (45) A Red turban on the head is mandatory, for it is the color of our ancestors. (46) Every Ad Dharmi should work hard for the progress and peace of the community. (47) Ad Dharmis hould organize themselves into cadres called martyrdom cells. They should work hard on the Ad Dharm’s projects. (48) Each Ad Dharmis hould separate himself form Hindus, Sikhs, and members of other religions. (49) Each Ad Dharmi should be a good citizen, a patriot loyal to the present government, and should follow the law of the land. (50) Ad Dharmis have the obligation to consider the Ad Dharm Mandal of Punjab, city of Jullundur, as their rightful representative, and to recognize that the programs of the AD Dharm are for their benefit. (51) It is the duty of every Ad Dharmi to trust the Ad Dharm Mandal of Jullundur, and to share its work. (52) All local branches of the Ad Dharm should be certified by the Ad Dharm Mandal of Jullundur, and those, which are not certified, should not be considered genuine. (53) All Ad Dharmis should save their fellow Ad Dharmis from fraud and selfishness on the part of other communities. If such a situation arises, the Mandal should be informed. (54) Each Ad Dharmi should report any difficulty concerning the community to the Mandal in Jullundur. (55) Ad Dharmis should subscribe to the qaum’s newspaper, Adi Danka. They should receive it regularly, read it regularly, a nd help support it regularly. (56) Anyone violating the laws of the Ad Dharm or of the guru, or who insults these laws in one way or another, will be liable to punishment, even the greatest punishment – being banished from the community. The main emphasis of these commandments, principles and duties, in the opinion of Babu Mangoo Ram, was to strengthen the social, cultural and religious life of the Dalits so that it could help them build Dalit Solidarity and empowerm. Baba Sahib |
Dr. Ambedkar was an iconoclastic social reformer who at the very formative years of his career realized what it meant to be an untouchable and how struggle against untouchability could be launched. The social reform movement of the caste Hindus could not win him to its side because of his existential understanding of the pangs of untouchability. The issue of untouchability, for social reformers, was a mere problem. This problem was exterior to them in the sense that it affects only the untouchables. They themselves had never experienced the sinisterous blows of untouchability. Though they were sympathetic to the cause of Dalits, but they belonged to the camp that imposed this inhuman system of social segregation on the Dalits.
Baba Sahib’s analysis of the origins of the untouchability and his action plans for its eradication were different from the approach and practice of the caste Hindu social reformers. What distinguished Baba Sahib from the other social reformers was that he looked at the problems of the Dalits from below, from a vantage point of the deprived and oppressed. This perspective led him to think differently from the dominant stream of social and political thought of his time. His major works on: Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development; Annihilation of Caste; Who Were the Shudras; The Untouchables: Who Were They and Why They Became Untouchables? are testimonies to his independent and original thinking. He smashed the mythological basis of untouchability and laid bare its economic roots. He built a strong case against the ‘Janam’ (birth) thesis of the untouchability which foreclosed all the ways for Dalit emancipation. He exhorted its victims to oppose it tooth and nail. He said, “It is disgraceful to live at the cost of one’s self respect. Self-respect is most vital factor in life. Without it, man is a mere cipher. To live worthily with self-respect one has to overcome difficulties. It is out of hard and ceaseless struggle alone that one derives strength, confidence and recognition”. He drew a distinction between merely living and living worthily. For living a worthy life, Ambedkar said, society must be based on liberty, equality and fraternity. For Ambedkar, social tyranny is more oppressive than the political tyranny and “a reformer who defies society, is a much more courageous man than a politician, who defies government” Ambedkar was one who defied society. In the beginning of his social reform crusade, he tried to get respect and equality for the Dalits by bringing reforms within the social set up of Hinduism. He continued his struggle for empowerment of the Dalits by seeking changes within the fold of Hinduism till 1935. When he realized that the salvation of Dalits was not possible while living within the fold of Hinduism, he started his scathing criticism and tirade against Hinduism and ultimately sought the emancipation of Dalits and its empowerment from outside the Hindu religion. Hence his conversion to Buddhism. For Ambedkar the issue of Dalit liberation was the foremost issue and he emphasized that Dalits themselves have to come forward for its realization. Thus, Ambedkar provided a subaltern perspective to see clearly the chameleon of Indian caste-ridden social set-up deceptively appearing in crimson colors and the ways to guard the interests of the Dalits. Babasaheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar made stringent efforts to transform the hierarchical structures of Indian society for the restoration of equal rights and justice to the neglected lot by building up a critique from within the structure of Indian society. His was not a theoretical attempt but a practical approach to the problems of untouchability. He tried to seek the solution to this perennial problem of the Indian society not by making appeals to the conscience of the usurpers or bringing transformation in the outlook of the individual by begging but by seeking transformation in the socio-religious and politico-economic structures of the Indian society by continuous and relentless struggle against the exploitative system where he thought the roots of the untouchability lay. He thought that until and unless the authority of the Dharam Shastras is shaken which provided divine sanction to the system of discrimination based on the caste hierarchy, the eradication of untouchability could not be realised. He was of the opinion that untouchability emanated neither from religious notions, nor from the much-popularised theory of Aryan conquest. On the contrary, it came into existence as a result of the struggle among the tribes at a stage when they were starting to settle down for a stable life. In the process, the settled tribes employed the broken tribesmen as guards against the marauding bands. These broken tribesmen employed as guards became untouchables. Dr. Ambedkar’s views on Indian nationalism in opposition to the dominant discourse of Hindu nationalism as represented by Raja Rammohan Roy, B.G. Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Golvalkar and Shyama Prasad Mookerjee on the one hand, and Communist-secular-socialist nationalism represented by M.N. Roy, R. P. Duta, T. Nagi Reddy and E.M.S. Namboodripad on the other, are not only distinct but also original. Hindu nationalism in essence aims at strengthening the Brahamanical supremacy in the post-colonial India. The communist-secular-social nationalism though based on abolition of class, its ideologues like that of the Hindu nationalism also belonged to the upper-castes and were myopic to the Dalits tribulations. Dr. Ambedkar’s conception of nationalism articulated and synthesized the national perceptions and aspirations of the downtrodden. Ambedkar’s alternative form of nationalism, popularly known as ‘Dalit-Bahujan-nationalism’ incorporated the subaltern philosophy of Jyotirao Phule and Periyar E.V. Ramaswami Naicker. It constructed an anti-Hindu and anti-Brahamanical discourse of Indian nationalism. It aimed at establishing a casteless and classless society where no one would be discriminated on the basis of birth and occupation. Within the Dalit-Bahuhjan framework of Indian nationalism, Ambedkar built up a critique of pre-colonial Brahmanism and its asymmetrical social set up based on low and high dichotomy of graded caste system. This system of inegalitarianism led to the process of exploitation by the unproductive Brahamanical castes of the various productive castes. Ambedkar’s understanding of the question of the identity and existence of the nation was based on his incisive analysis of the oppressive character of the Hindu community. Since the dominant Hindu discourse of Indian nationalism remained indifferent towards removal of the caste system; and the economic analysis of the communist secular socialist school also failed to highlight the issue of caste in its mechanical interpretation of class, Ambedkar – himself an untouchable and victim of untouchability – formulated his own framework from the perspective of the untouchables for the understanding of the system of caste and untouchability. The foundations of dalit-Bahujan nationalism lie in this framework developed by Ambedkar. It aimed at restructuring the Indian society into a casteless and classless and egalitarian Sangha (Ilaiah 2001: 109). Annihilation of caste was its central theme. Caste for Ambedkar was nothing but Brahmanism incarnate. “Brahmanism is the poison which has spoiled Hinduism” (Ambedkar 1995: 92). Ambedkar realised that any form of nationalism whose roots were steeped into Hinduism could not be a solution to the problem of dalits. Any discourse of nationalism bereft of annihilation of caste was just not acceptable to him. The agenda of annihilation of caste was so important to him that it became a central point of his struggle against colonial rule. In the first Round Table Conference, he minced no words in criticizing the British government for its failure to undo untouchability. Swaraj without extinction of caste had no meaning for Ambedkar. In his undelivered speech to the Jat Pat Todak Mandal of Lahore, he said, “In the fight for swaraj you fight with the whole nation on your side. In this, you have to fight against the whole nation and that too your own. But it is more important than swaraj. There is no use having swaraj, if you cannot defend it. More important than the question of defending swaraj is the question of defending Hindus under the swaraj. In my opinion, only when the Hindu society becomes a casteless society that it can hope to have strength enough to defend itself. Without such internal strength, swaraj for Hindus may turn out to be only a step towards slavery”. Thus, it was Ambedkar’s subaltern perspective, which distinguished his conception of swaraj from that of the protagonists of the various shades of the national freedom movement. In his editorial in the Bahishkrit Bharat, Ambedkar wrote on 29 July 1927 “If Tilak had been born among the untouchables, he would not have raised the slogan ‘Swaraj is my birthright’, but he would have raised the slogan ‘Annihilation of untouchability is my birthright’”.
|
From Servitude to Assertion:
Ambedkar’s Subaltern Approach to Nationalism And Dalits Liberation Ambedkar and Dalitisation of Untouchables Traditionally, according to the Hindu code of conduct, the untouchables were placed at the bottom of the caste hierarchy and were known by different names in different parts of the country. They were called Shudras, Atishudras, Chandalas, Antyajas, Pariahs, Dheds, Panchamas, Avarnas, Namashudras, Asprusthas, etc. etc. The hierarchical and inegalitarian structure of Indian society came into existence during the period of manusmriti. The manusmriti set the tenor of social discrimination based on birth. This, in turn led to economic degradation and political isolation of the untouchables now popularly known as Dalits. Dalits are the poor, neglected and downtrodden lot. Their social disabilities were specific, severe and numerous. Their touch, shadow or even voices were considered by the caste Hindus to be polluting. They were not allowed to keep certain domestic animals, use certain metals for ornaments, eat a particular type of food, use a particular type of footwear, wear a particular type of dress and were forced to live in the outskirts of the villages towards which the wind blew and dirt flowed. Their houses were dirty, dingy and unhygienic where poverty and squalor loomed large. They were denied the use of public wells. The doors of the Hindu temples were closed for them and their children were not allowed into the schools attended by the children of caste Hindu. Barbers and washer men refused their services to them. Public services were closed to them. They followed menial hereditary occupations such as those of street sweepers, scavengers, shoe makers and carcasses removers. Generally the term dalit includes those who are designated in administrative parlance as Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes. However, in common political discourse, the term dalit is so far mainly referred to Scheduled Castes. The term Scheduled Caste was used for the first time by the British officials in Government of India Act, 1935. Prior to this, the untouchable castes were known as depressed classes. Mahatma Gandhi gave them the name Harijans meaning children of God. Gandhi himself did not coin the name. He borrowed the name from a Bhakti movement saint of the 17th century Narsinh Mehta. The name Harijan became popular during 1931 amid conflicts between Gandhi and Ambedkar on the issue of guarantying communal political representation to the dalits. Gandhi took this move as a step towards the disintegration of Hindu society. By terming the untouchables as Harijans, Gandhi tried to persuade caste Hindus to shed their prejudices against the achchutas i.e. untouchables. The purpose to adopt this new nomenclature of Harijan for the untouchables was to induce change in the heart and behaviour of the Hindus towards untouchables. At the same time, it was hoped that this new name would be accepted by the untouchables who would too try to cultivate the virtues which it connotes. To quote Gandhi “…probably, Antyaja brethren would lovingly accept that name and try to cultivate the virtues which it connotes… may the Antyaja become Harijan both in name and nature” (Gandhi 1971: 244-5). The term Harijan got further recognition as an emancipatory nomenclature in the formation of Harijan Sewak Sangh, an organisation established for the purpose of upliftment of the dalits under the aegis of the Congress. A weekly ‘Harijan’ was also started by Gandhi to provide voice for the cause of the downtrodden. However, Ambedkar did not find any substance in the change of name for the redressal of the structural hindrances that stood menacingly in the way of the their all around amelioration. To him it did not make any difference whether the downtrodden were called achchuta or Harijan, ‘as the new nomenclature did not change their status in the social order’ [Shah 2001a: 21]. The term dalit was used by no less a person than Ambedkar in his fortnightly called Bahishkrit Bharat (Guru 2001: 100). Though Ambedkar did not popularise the word dalit for untouchables, his thoughts and actions have contributed to its growth and popularity. The word dalit is a common usage in Marathi, Hindi, Gujarati and many other Indian languages, denoting the poor and oppressed persons. It also refers to those who have been broken, ground down by those above them in a deliberate way (Shah 2001b: 195-196). “It includes all the oppressed and exploited sections of society. It does not confine itself merely to economic exploitation in terms of appropriation of surplus. It also relates to suppression of culture – way of life and value system – and, more importantly, the denial of dignity. It has essentially emerged as a political category. For some, it connotes an ideology for fundamental change in the social structure and relationships” (Shah 2001a: 22). The word dalit indicates struggle for an egalitarian order (Zelliot 2001a: 232) and provides the concept of pride to the politically active dalits (Zelliot 2001 b: 130). The word dalit gained currency through the writings of Marathi writers in the early 1970s. “Dalit writers who have popularised the word have expressed their notion of dalit identity in their essays, poems, dramas, autobiographies, novels and short stories. They have reconstructed their past and their view of the present. They have expressed their anger, protest and aspiration” (Shah 2001a: 22). “Dalit” is a by-product of the Ambedkar movement and indicates a political and social awareness. Ambedkar adopted a different approach and philosophy for the emancipation of Scheduled Castes. He wanted to liberate the dalits by building an egalitarian social order which he believed was not possible within the fold of Hinduism whose very structure was hierarchical which relegated the dalits to the bottom. Initially, he tried to seek emancipation of the dalits by bringing transformation within the structure of Hinduism through his efforts for opening the temples for the dalits and multi-caste dinners. However, Ambedkar came to realise soon that such an approach would not bring the desired result for the amelioration of the inhuman condition of the dalits. He asserted that the dalits should come forward and fight for their own cause. He gave them the mantra – educate, organise and agitate. He did not have faith in the charitable spirit of the caste Hindus towards the untouchables as it failed to bring any change in the oppressive social order. Ambedkar did not have any faith in Mahatmas and Saints whose main emphasis was not on the equality between man and man. Their philosophy, according to him, was mainly concerned with the relation between man and God. Baba Saheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, himself a dalit, made efforts to transform the hierarchical structures of Indian society for the restoration of equal rights and justice to the neglected lot by building up a critique from within the structure of Indian society. His was not a theoretical attempt but a practical approach to the problems of untouchability. He tried to seek the solution to this perennial problem of the Indian society not by making appeals to the conscience of the usurpers or bringing transformation in the outlook of the individual by begging but by seeking transformation in the socio-religious and politico-economic structures of the Indian society by continuous and relentless struggle against the exploitative system where he thought the roots of the untouchability lay. He thought that until and unless the authority of the Dharam Shastras is shaken which provided divine sanction to the system of discrimination based on the case hierarchy, the eradication of untouchability could not be realised. It was his subaltern perspective, a perspective from below which helped him to come to the conclusion that untouchability emanated neither from religious notions, nor from the much-popularised theory of Aryan conquest. He believed that it came into existence as a result of the struggle among the tribes at a stage when they were starting to settle down for a stable community living. In the process, the broken tribesmen were employed by the settled tribes as guards against the marauding bands. These broken tribesmen employed as guards became untouchables. However, Ambedkar could not provide answer to the problem as to why only these broken tribesmen were confined to the one part of the village in the setting towards which the wind blew and the dirt of the village flowed. Ambedkar’s tirade against untouchability was a tirade to make these people conscious of their rights, and to prepare them to agitate and win their rights. Dalit Liberation: Subaltern Approach With the entry of Ambedkar into the Indian political arena during 1920s, the issue of social reforms achieved a new dimension. He was of the opinion that until and unless the downtrodden themselves came forward to fight their own battle, no one else could alleviate their grievances. No one else could know better than them about their own state of affairs. Ambedkar impressed upon the people to understand their own affairs themselves. Self-awakening, he believed, could provide them necessary strength to fight against evils in society. “Ambedkar (started) exorcising the spirit of despair from the minds of dumb millions who had been forced to live the lives of sub-human beings. Here was a liberator preaching them the grand universal law that liberty is neither received as a gift; nor begged for a charity it has to be fought for. Self-elevation is not achieved by the blessing of others but only by one’s own struggle and deed. Those inert, dormant masses lacked courage and needed a vision and a mission. Ambedkar was now inspiring them to do battle for their human rights. He was driving them to action by acting himself Ambedkar was displaying energy by his own action; arousing their faith by showing faith” (Keer 1971: 73-74). Although low-caste protest movement which started with Jyotirao Phule in the 19th century continued in western India with leaders like Vithalji Ramji Shinde, Shivram Janba Kamble, Gangaram Kishnajee and others, they could not pull out the victims of the Brahmanical system of social gradation from their forced ghettos to fight for themselves. However, the movement started by Jyotirao Phule was more nearer to the real goal of dalit liberation than that of the movements led by the Brahmin liberal reformers like Ranade, Gokhale and Karve who concentrated more on inducing reforms in the different settings of Hindu dominated society rather than its total transformation. It was Dr. Ambedkar who provided for the first time to the dalits a system of struggle which they could consider as their own. Although Phule had done the same before him in the 19th century, yet Phule like him did not belong to the untouchable caste. Phule was born in Mali-Kunbi caste broadly considered Shudra but not ‘untouchable’, while Ambedkar was born in the Mahar community which is an untouchable caste. Another factor which distinguished Ambedkar from Phule was that the latter studied at local mission school but had no opportunity available to study abroad. Ambedkar’s stays abroad during his higher education exposed him to English political institutions, liberal democracy and the system of rule of law, which cultivated in him a faith in parliamentary democracy as the best means for achieving the socio-economic liberation of the under- privileged sections of the Indian society. He was equally concerned with the cause of the freedom of India from the colonial rule. Ambedkar said “I will demand what is right full for my people, and I will certainly uphold the demand for swaraj” (Ibid. 145). However, Ambedkar was always concerned to highlight the cause of the downtrodden and ever ready to redeem the same. At the first Round Table Conference, he said that “One fifth of the total population of British India was reduced to a position of worse than that of a serf or a slave. He then declared to the surprise of all that the untouchables in India were also for replacing the existing government by a government of the people, for the people and by the people. He said that this change in the attitudes of the untouchables to British Rule in India was surprising and a momentous phenomenon. And justifying his stand, he observed with a rise in his voice and a glow in his eyes: ‘when we compare our present position with the one which it was our lot to bear in Indian society of pre-British days, we find that, instead of marching on, we are marking time. Before the British, we were in the loathsome condition due to our untouchability. Has the British government done anything to remove it? Before the British, we could not draw water from the village well. Has the British government secured up the right to the well? Before the British, we could not enter the temple. Can we enter now? Before the British, we were denied entry into the police force. Does the British government admit us into the force? Before the British, we were not allowed to serve in military. Is that career now open to us? To none of these questions can be given an affirmative answer. Our wrongs have remained as open sores and they have not been righted, although 150 years of British rule have rolled away’ ” (Ibid. 149-150). He continued “of what good is such a government to anybody. We must have a government in which the men in power will give their undivided allegiance to the best interests to the country. We must have a government in which men in power, where obedience will end and resistance will begin, will not be afraid to amend the social and economic code of life which the dictates of justice and expediency so urgently call for” (quoted in ibid.: 150). So from the above it is clear that for Dr. Ambedkar, political freedom was as important as the social transformation of Indian society. In his speech delivered at Bombay on 12 June 1951, Ambedkar said that the Scheduled Castes should come forward to cooperate with other communities in strengthening the newly won freedom. But at the same time he cautioned his fellow beings to keep in view the interest of their community. He was sure that the Scheduled Castes could not capture political power by joining the Congress. To win, guard and promote the interests of the untouchables, he emphasized that they should consolidate themselves under their own political party (Bakshi 1992: 60). Ambedkar was of the firm belief that “howsoever, the caste Hindus worked hard for the welfare of the untouchables they did not know their mind. That was why he was fundamentally opposed to any organisation started by the caste Hindus for the upliftment of the Depressed Classes” (Keer 1971: 43). His principal objective was to achieve a respectable place of existence for the downtrodden sections of the society to which he himself belonged. But at the same time he was also not ready to compromise with the cause of the Indian Freedom. He too wanted swaraj but the contents of his conception of swaraj were more versatile than that of the Savarna leaders of the Indian Freedom movement. He accepted the responsibility of framing a constitution for independent India. He said, “I feel now that it was the golden opportunity for me and my community. By framing the constitution, I convinced the Hindus, who were abusing me and my party for the last twenty years as anti-nationalist, that they were entirely wrong. We are as staunch a nationalist organisation as any other” (quoted in Bakshi: 1992: 60). However, Ambedkar’s joining of the Congress government created a great amount of confusion among the Scheduled Castes. In clarification of his joining the government he said, “I have joined the central government but have not become a member of the Congress and have no intention to do so. I was invited by the Congress to join the central government and I had joined it unconditionally. I shall come out any time. I think it is useless to stay there. Our condition is such that it is necessary that our men should be in the administrative machinery. There is no fear of just legislation, but even good laws may be badly administered and if the government is composed of persons who are by tradition against the interests of the Scheduled Castes, then there can be no hope for us” (quoted in ibid.: 62). It was his subaltern perspective which made him to think practically that the administration was unsympathetic to the Scheduled Castes because it was completely run by the officers who were relatives of the oppressors or were known to them. Had these officers belonged to the Scheduled Castes they would have given proper protection to their brethren. He was of the opinion that the high caste tyranny and oppression could be averted only if more of the Scheduled Castes could find places in the administration. This could be achieved by being inside the government rather than by sitting outside. Ambedkar, a firm believer in the parliamentary form of government, impressed upon the Scheduled Castes and Backward Castes, who together formed majority of the population of the country, to come forward to capture political power in the system of adult franchise. He said, “People do not seem to buck up courage because they are overwhelmed by the belief that the Congress government is there for ever. I said, this is a wrong impression. In a popular democracy, no government is permanent and not even the government established by the two of the tallest congressmen, Pandit Nehru and Sardar Patel. If you organise, you can even capture that government” (quoted in ibid. 66). Ambedkar was not only a visionary; he tried his level best to translate his vision into a practical reality. With the purpose of breaking the ‘ladderless multi storied tower of Hindu society’ he formed the Independent Labour Party in 1936 so as to have a broad alliance of peasants, workers and Scheduled Castes. In 1942, he formed another political party for defending the interests of the Scheduled Castes. That party was known as Scheduled Castes Federation (SCF). Although the SCF could not make a significant mark in the electoral politics, it provided an alternative to the dalits to think about capturing the political power by organising themselves into a political organisation. After the death of Ambedkar, his close associates formed the Republican Party of India (RPI) in deference to the wishes of their mentor and saviour. Ambedkar hoped that “the Republican Party would be a vehicle for all who sought to achieve the great goals surpassing the narrow confines of the Scheduled Caste Federation” (Omvedt 2001: 150). It shows that Ambedkar wanted to consolidate the downtrodden into a significant political force to guide them to achieve a dignified place in the Indian society. During his long journey of political struggle, he had come to realise that the issue of dalit liberation and empowerment could never be genuinely taken up by the caste Hindus. The dalits themselves have to come forward to take up the herculean task of their emancipation and empowerment. He had no hopes from the caste Hindus to get any help in such a project. He was greatly disillusioned after his experiences of Mahad agitation in 1927 where inspite of the resolution of Bombay State Assembly to declare all public places open to untouchables, the high caste Hindus violently resisted the untouchables’ attempt to drink water at the public pond. Yet, in another struggle to seek special rights for the Scheduled Castes during the Round Table Conferences, in the form of special electorate, Ambedkar was opposed tooth and nail by Mahatma Gandhi. Although Ambedkar succeeded in getting communal award for the benefits of Scheduled Castes, yet finally he had to compromise under moral duress due to Mahatma Gandhi’s fast-unto-death. “The clash with Gandhi not only shook Ambedkar’s faith in the legal method of redressing grievances, but also convinced him of the futility of striving for equality by remaining within Hinduism. Ambedkar now opened that Hinduism was incapable of reform on its own and that the untouchables must ready themselves to fight their battle for equality alone” (Doctor 1997: 125). Moreover, even during his earlier attempts – three temple satyagrahas – to seek equality within Hinduism, Ambedkar failed to get any support from Gandhi or the Indian National Congress. As said earlier his efforts to join the popular Ganapati festivals in Bombay also proved futile. So, were his attempts to arrange inter-caste dinners and to organise a public ceremony for making the low-caste put on the sacred thread (Zelliot 1986: 163). The failures of all these attempts to bring reforms in the system of Hindu religion demonstrated to Ambedkar, “that the untouchables were not really a part of Hindu society and would never be accepted as equals by the Hindus within that framework (Verma 1999: 2806). In other words, the project of dalit liberation through reforms in Hindu religion failed to yield any result. In the face of such failure, Ambedkar was forced to leave the Hindu religion. At the Yeola Conference, in Nasik district, on October 13, 1935 Ambedkar said that unfortunately he was born a Hindu untouchable and it was beyond his power to prevent that. But he declared that it was within his power to severe ties with that religion. He thundered, “I solemnly assure you that I will not die a Hindu” (Keer 1971: 253). Twenty years after, in October 1956 he converted to Buddhism. With this declaration of Ambedkar, the struggle of dalit liberation entered into a new phase: fighting against the oppressive structures of Hinduism from outside. This new form of dalit struggle which distinguished itself from the pre-1935 struggle of Ambedkar for transformation of the Hindu religion from within, shocked the Hindu community out of complacency and at the same time provided an opportunity to the untouchables to “grasp their own future” (Zelliot 1986: 165). Dr. Ambedkar realised that caste and Brahminic Hinduism reinforce each other and discriminate against the downtrodden sections of the society. He said in 1946, “To the untouchables, Hinduism is veritable chamber of horrors” (Lobo 2001: 243). He traced the genesis of the oppressive nature of the caste dominated Indian society to the ‘sacred’ shastras of the Hindus who guarded them so closely that if any one except them read or heard them he would commit an act of sacrilege. Manusmriti sanctioned severest punishment for such a sacrilegious act. Ambedkar quotes from Manusmriti, “If the shudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the Veda, then his ears should be filled with (molten) lead and if he utters the Veda, then his tongue should be cut-off; if he has mastered the Veda his body should be cut to pieces” (Thorat and Deshpande 2001: 73). According to Ambedkar the Vedas, smritis and shastras were all instruments of torture used by Hinduism against the untouchables (Lobo 2001: 243). In fact it was Ambedkar’s subaltern perspective which pierced through the shastras to reveal their true face. He emphasized in his “Annihilation of Caste” that the smritis and shastras were not the embodiment of religion but a system of rules to deprive the untouchables even of their basic needs and deny them equal status in the society. Ambedkar distinguished between rules and principles. Rules are practical and based on prescription. But principles are intellectual and are useful methods of judging things. Rules seek to tell an agent just what course of action to pursue. Principles do not prescribe a specific course of action. Rules are commands and tell what to do and how to do it, whereas principles provide man a reference point to his conscience to guide his course of action. This difference between rules and principles, according to Ambedkar, make the act done in pursuit of them different in quality and in content. Performing an act under the command of a rule and in the light of a principle, as a guide of conscience, are two different things. The principle may be wrong but the act is conscious and responsible by virtue of the fact that such an act has been performed by an individual by making use of his critical abilities. The rule may be right but the act performed thereof is mechanical. A religious act may not be a correct act but according to Ambedkar must at least be a responsible act. “To permit of this responsibility, religion must mainly be a matter of principles only. It can not be a matter of rules. The moment it degenerates into rules it ceases to be religion, as it kills responsibility which is the essence of a truly religious act” (Ambedkar 1995: 88). On the basis of a discussion around the distinction between rules and principles in reference to religion, Ambedkar comes to conclusion that what is called Religion by the Hindus is nothing but a multitudes of commands and prohibition. He said, the Hindu religion, as contained in the Vedas and smritis, is nothing but a mass of sacrificial, social, political and sanitary rules and regulations, all mixed up. Therefore, he said that there should be no hesitation in saying that such a religion must be destroyed and there is nothing irreligious in working for the destruction of such a religion that discriminates against its own people whom it bracketed as untouchables. The most notorious aspect of these bunch of rules and codes of ordinances, masquerading as religion, is that they are made immutable – same for all generations, iniquitous – not the same for one class as for another, and were invested with the character of finality and fixity. Religion, in the sense of spiritual principles is conspicuous by its absence in them. In other words, what the Hindu call religion is, in fact, not a religion in a true sense of the term. It is “really Law or at best legalised class ethics” (ibid. 89). Ambedkar exhorted the untouchables to tear the mask and find in it the hidden conspiracy against them which projected the code of conduct as a religion. He opined that once the people come to know that what Hindus called religion is not a religion but a law, they could urge for its amendment or abolition because law can be changed but not religion. One can leave religion but cannot change it because, said Ambedkar, “the idea of Religion is generally speaking not associated with the idea of change” (ibid. 90). It is in this context that Ambedkar’s decision to leave Hinduism and his conversion to Buddhism becomes self-explanatory as a step for dalit liberation. The above discussion shows that what Ambedkar was against was a religion of rules not religion in itself. Had he been against religion he could not have had embraced Buddhism. Ambedkar said “…I agree with Burke when he says that ‘True religion is the foundation of society, the basis on which all true civil governments rest, and both their sanction’, Consequently, when I argue that these ancient rules of life be annulled, I am anxious that its place shall be taken by a religion of principles, which alone can lay claim to being a true religion” (ibid.: 90). Ambedkar wanted to raise religion in consonance with liberty, equality and fraternity. In short, his religion could not be against the principles of democracy. He said, “I am no authority on the subject. But I am told that for such religious principles, as will be in consonance with liberty, equality and fraternity is, may not be necessary for you to borrow from foreign sources and that you could draw for such principles on the Upanishads” (ibid.: 92). An other aspect of Dr. Ambedkar’s subaltern approach for the emancipation of dalits and their empowerment was his distinct formulation of Indian nationalism in opposition to the dominant discourse of Hindu nationalism as represented by Raja Rammohan Roy, B.G. Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Golvalkar and Shyama Prasad Mookerjee on the one hand and Communist secular socialist nationalism represented by M.N. Roy, R. P. Duta, T. Nagi Reddy and E.M.S. Namboodripad on the other. Although the protagonists of Hindu nationalism differed in many ways from each other, in essence they strengthen the Brahamanical hegemony in modern India. The communist secular social nationalism though based on abolition of class, its ideologues like that of the Hindu nationalism belonged to the upper-caste and upper-class background. Kancha Ilaiah put these two streams of Indian nationalism on a single platform by emphasizing that though they “appear to be antagonistic in their discourses of transformation; the social forces that were engaged in this discourse did not differ in their roots of existence and formation. In caste/class term, they belong to the Brahamanical upper and middle class. Though their consciousness appeared to be antagonistic to each other, their being and self remained Hindu. This was one of the main reasons why the Marxists and socialists schools failed to problematic and critique Hinduism and Brahmanism” (Ilaiah 2001: 109). Dr. Ambedkar’s conception of nationalism articulated and synthesized the national perceptions and aspirations of the downtrodden. Ambedkar’s alternative form of nationalism, popularly known as ‘dalit-Bahujan-nationalism’ also incorporated the subaltern philosophy of Jyotirao Phule and Periyar E.V. Ramaswami Naicker. It constructed an anti-Hindu and anti-Brahamanical discourse of Indian nationalism. It aimed at establishing a casteless and classless society where no one would be discriminated on the basis of birth and occupation. Within the dalit-Bahuhjan framework of Indian nationalism, Ambedkar built up a critique of pre-colonial Brahmanism and its inegalitarian social set up based on low and high dichotomy of graded caste system. This system of in egalitarianism led to the process of exploitation by the unproductive Brahamanical castes of the various productive castes. Ambedkar understands of the question of the identity and existence of the nation was based on his incisive analysis of the oppressive character of the Hindu community. “By arguing for the rights and basic needs of the dalits, he challenges the assumptions of both nationalist politics and indigenous communitarian politics” (Verma 1999: 2804). Since the dominant Hindu discourse of Indian nationalism remained indifferent towards removal of the caste system; and the economic analysis of the communist secular socialist school also failed to highlight the issue of caste in its mechanical interpretation of class, Ambedkar – himself an untouchable and victim of untouchability – formulated his own framework from the perspective of the untouchables for the understanding of the system of caste and untouchability. The foundation of dalit-Bahujan nationalism lies in this framework developed by Ambedkar. It aimed at restructuring the Indian society into a casteless and classless and egalitarian Sangha (Ilaiah 2001: 109). Annihilation of caste was its central theme. Caste for Ambedkar was nothing but Brahmanism incarnate. “Brahmanism is the poison which has spoiled Hinduism” (Ambedkar 1995: 92). Ambedkar realised that any form of nationalism whose roots were steeped into Hinduism could not be a solution to the problem of dalits. Any discourse of nationalism bereft of annihilation of caste was just not acceptable to him. The agenda of annihilation of caste was so important to him that it became a central point of his struggle against colonial rule. In the first Round Table Conference, he minced no words in criticizing the British government for its failure to undo untouchability. Swaraj without extinction of caste had no meaning for Ambedkar. In his undelivered speech to the Jat Pat Todak Mandal of Lahore, he said, “In the fight for swaraj you fight with the whole nation on your side. In this, you have to fight against the whole nation and that too your own. But it is more important than swaraj. There is no use having swaraj, if you cannot defend it. More important than the question of defending swaraj is the question of defending Hindus under the swaraj. In my opinion, only when the Hindu society becomes a casteless society that it can hope to have strength enough to defend it. Without such internal strength, swaraj for Hindus may turn out to be only a step towards slavery” (ibid. 97). Thus, it was Ambedkar’s subaltern perspective which distinguished his conception of swaraj from that of the protagonists of the various shades of the national freedom movement. In his editorial in the Bahishkrit Bharat a fortnightly, on 29 July 1927, Ambedkar wrote, “If Tilak had been born among the untouchables, he would not have raised the slogan ‘Swaraj is my birthright’, but he would have risen the slogan ‘Annihilation of untouchability is my birthright’”.
Conclusions Dr. Ambedkar was an iconoclastic social reformer who at the very formative years of his career realised what it meant to be an untouchable and how struggle against untouchability could be launched. The social reform movement of the caste Hindus could not win him to its side because of his existential understanding of the pangs of untouchability. The issue of untouchability, for social reformers, was a mere problem. This problem was exterior to them in the sense that it affects only the untouchables. They themselves had never experienced the sinister us blows of untouchability. Moreover, though they were sympathetic to the cause of dalits but nevertheless, according to the social framework of the Indian society, they belonged to the opposite camp which practiced this inhuman system of social segregation based on sheer birth. Although Ambedkar dedicated his book “Who Were Shudras” to Phule, the precursor of non-Brahmin anti-caste movement, he did not approve the movement as a harbinger of dalit liberation. In a message given to the Satyashodak magazine, on the 16th Satyashodak Social Conference, Ambedkar said, “The non-Brahmins have effaced the memory of Jyotiba Phooley completely. Not only that but that class has shamelessly betrayed his philosophy” (quoted in Kuber 1987: 119). According to Ambedkar the non-Brahmin leaders failed to germicide th..
|
| | Home | About Us | Contact Us | Community Activities | News | Photo Gallery | Articles | Culture | Media | Literature | |
| | Dr. Ambedkar | Kanshi Ram | Babu Mangoo Ram | Ad-Dharm | The Gurus | Lord Buddha | Letter Box | Great Personalities | |
+919872861290.
