CASTE INEQUALITIES
We have seen two instances of the expression of social divisions in the arena of politics, one largely positive and the other largely negative. Let us turn to our final case, that of caste and politics, that has both positive and negative aspects.
Unlike gender and religion, caste division is special to India. All societies have some kind of social inequality and some form of division of labour. In most societies, occupations are passed on from one generation to another. Caste system is an extreme form of this. What makes it different from other societies is that in this system, the hereditary occupational division was sanctioned by rituals. Members of the same caste group were supposed to form a social community that practiced the same or similar occupation, married within the caste group and did not eat with members from other caste groups.
Caste system was based on the exclusion of and discrimination against the ‘outcaste’ groups. They were subjected to the inhuman practice of untouchability about which you have studied in Class IX. That is why political leaders and social reformers like Jotiba Phule, Gandhiji, B.R. Ambedkar, and Periyar Ramaswami.
Naicker advocated and worked to establish a society in which caste inequalities are absent.
Partly due to their efforts and partly due to other socio-economic changes, castes and the caste system in modern India have undergone great changes. With economic development, large-scale URBANISATION, growth of literacy and education, OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY, and the weakening of the position of landlords in the villages, the old notions of CASTE HIERARCHY are breaking down. Now, most of the time, in urban areas it does not matter much who is walking along next to us on a street or eating at the next table in a restaurant. The Constitution of India prohibited any caste-based discrimination and laid the foundations of policies to reverse the injustices of the caste system. If a person who lived a century ago were to return to India, she would be greatly surprised at the change that has come about in the country.
Yet caste has not disappeared from contemporary India. Some of the older aspects of caste have persisted. Even now most people marry within their own caste or tribe. Untouchability has not ended completely, despite constitutional prohibition. Effects of centuries of advantages and disadvantages continue to be felt today. The caste groups that had access to education under the old system have done very well in acquiring modern education as well. Those groups that did not have access to education or were prohibited from acquiring it have naturally lagged behind. That is why there is a disproportionately large presence of ‘upper caste’ among the urban middle classes in our country. Caste continues to be closely linked to economic status. (See Plus Box Below.)
Source: This topic is taken from NCERT TEXTBOOK
SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY OF INDIA
The Census of India records the religion of each and every Indian after every ten years. The person who fills the Census form visits every household and records the religion of each member of that household exactly the way each person describes it. If someone says she has ‘no religion’ or that he is an ‘atheist’, this is exactly how it is recorded. Thus we have reliable information on the proportion of different religious communities in the country and how it has changed over the years. The pie chart below presents the population proportion of six major religious communities in the country. Since Independence, the total population of each community has increased substantially but their proportion in the country’s population has not changed much. In percentage terms, the population of the Hindus, Jains and Christians has declined marginally since 1961. The proportion of Muslim, Sikh and Buddhist population has increased slightly. There is a common but mistaken impression that the proportion of Muslims in the country’s population is going to overtake other religious communities. Expert estimates done for the Prime Minister’s High-Level Committee (popularly known as Sachar Committee) show that the proportion of Muslims is expected to go up a little, by about 3 to 4 percent, in the next 50 years. It proves that in overall terms, the population balance of different religious communities is not likely to change in a big way.
The same is true of the major caste groups. The Census of India counts two social groups: the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Both these broad groups include hundreds of castes or tribes whose names are listed in an official Schedule. Hence the prefix ‘Scheduled’ in their name. The Scheduled Castes, commonly known as Dalits, include those that were previously regarded as ‘outcaste’ in the Hindu social order and were subjected to exclusion and untouchability. The Scheduled Tribes, often referred to as Adivasis, including those communities that led a secluded life usually in hills and forests and did not interact much with the rest of society. In 2011, the Scheduled Castes were 16.6 percent and the Scheduled Tribes were 8.6 percent of the country’s population.
The Census does not yet count the Other Backward Classes, the group we discussed in class IX. Hence there are some differences about their proportion in the country’s population. The National Sample Survey of 2004-05 estimates their population to be around 41 percent. Thus the SC, ST, and the OBC together account for about two-thirds of the country’s population and about three-fourths of the Hindu population.
Population of different religious communities in India, 2011
Source: This topic is taken from NCERT TEXTBOOK
CASTE IN POLITICS
As in the case of communalism, casteism is rooted in the belief that caste is the sole basis of the social community. According to this way of thinking, people belonging to the same caste belong to a natural social community and have the same interests which they do not share with anyone from another caste. As we saw in the case of communalism, such a belief is not borne out by our experience. Caste is one aspect of our experience but it is not the only relevant or the most important aspect.
Caste can take various forms in politics:
* When parties choose candidates in elections, they keep in mind the caste composition of the electorate and nominate candidates from different castes so as to muster necessary support to win elections. When governments are formed, political parties usually take care that representatives of different castes and tribes find a place in it.
* Political parties and candidates in elections make appeals to caste sentiment to muster support. Some political parties are known to favour some castes and are seen as their representatives
* Universal adult franchise and the principle of one-person-one-vote compelled political leaders to gear up to the task of mobilising and securing political support. It also brought new consciousness among the people of castes that were hitherto treated as inferior and low.
The focus on caste in politics can sometimes give an impression that elections are all about caste and nothing else.
That is far from true. Just consider these:
* No parliamentary constituency in the country has a clear majority of one single caste. So, every candidate and party needs to win the confidence of more than one caste and community to win elections.
* No party wins the votes of all the voters of a caste or community. When people say that a caste is a ‘vote bank’ of one party, it usually means that a large proportion of the voters from that caste vote for that party.
* Many political parties may put up candidates from the same caste (if that caste is believed to dominate the electorate in a particular constituency). Some voters have more than one candidate from their caste while many voters have no candidate from their caste.
* The ruling party and the sitting MP or MLA frequently lose elections in our country. That could not have happened if all castes and communities were frozen in their political preferences.
Clearly, while caste matters in electoral politics, so do many other factors. The voters have a strong attachment to political parties which is often stronger than their attachment to their caste or community. People within the same caste or community have different interests depending on their economic condition. Rich and poor or men and women from the same caste often vote very differently. People’s assessment of the performance of the government and the popularity rating of the leaders matter and are often decisive in the election.
Do you think that political leaders are right to treat people belonging to a caste as ‘vote banks’?
Source: This topic is taken from NCERT TEXTBOOK
CASTE INEQUALITY TODAY
Caste is an important source of economic inequality because it regulates access to resources of various kinds. For example, in the past, the so-called ‘untouchable’ castes were denied the right to own land, while only the so-called ‘twice-born’ castes had the right to education. Although this kind of explicit and formalised inequality based on caste is now outlawed, the effects of centuries of accumulated advantages and disadvantages continue to be felt. Moreover, new kinds of inequalities have also developed.
The relationship between caste and economic status has certainly changed a lot. Today, it is possible to find very rich and very poor people in every caste, whether ‘low’ or ‘high’. This was not true even twenty or thirty years ago – it was very rare indeed to find rich people among the ‘lowest’ castes. However, as this evidence from the National Sample Survey shows, caste continues to be very strongly linked to economic status in many important ways:
* The average economic status (measured by criteria like monthly consumption expenditure) of caste groups still follows the old hierarchy – the ‘upper’ castes are best off, the Dalits and Adivasis are worst off, and the backward classes are in between.
* Although every caste has some poor members, the proportion living in extreme poverty (below the official ‘poverty line’) is much higher for the lowest castes and much lower for the upper castes, with the backward classes once again in between.
* Although every caste has some members who are rich, the upper castes are heavily over-represented among the rich while the lower castes are severely under-represented.
Source: This topic is taken from NCERT TEXTBOOK
POLITICS IN CASTE
We have so far looked at what caste does to politics. But it does not mean that there is only a one-way relation between caste and politics. Politics too influences the caste system and caste identities by bringing them into the political arena.
Thus, it is not politics that gets caste-ridden, it is the caste that gets politicised. This takes several forms:
* Each caste group tries to become bigger by incorporating within it neighboring castes or sub-castes which were earlier excluded from it.
* Various caste groups are required to enter into a coalition with other castes or communities and thus enter into a dialogue and negotiation.
* New kinds of caste groups have come up in the political arena like ‘backward’ and ‘forward’ caste groups.
Thus, caste plays different kinds of roles in politics. In some situations, the expression of caste differences in politics gives many disadvantaged communities the space to demand their share of power. In this sense-caste politics has helped people from Dalits and OBC castes to gain better access to decision making. Several political and non-political organisations have been demanding and agitating for an end to discrimination against particular castes, for more dignity and more access to land, resources and opportunities.
At the same time, exclusive attention to caste can produce negative results as well. As in the case of religion, politics based on caste identity alone is not very healthy in a democracy. It can divert attention from other pressing issues like poverty, development and corruption. In some cases, caste division leads to tensions, conflict, and even violence.
Source: This topic is taken from NCERT TEXTBOOK