by Maguni Charan Behera
On 30 July 2024, BJP MP Anurag Thakur while addressing the Lok Sabha remarked that those whose caste is unknown should not talk about caste census. This has created ruckus in the Parliament and outside. Privilege motion is contemplated against Anurag Thakur. Rahul Gandhi feels insulted. These two issues – Anurag Thaku’s remark and follow up reactions – incite me to think where are our leaders leading us? Anurag Thakur’s insinuations are clearly meant for Rahul Gandhi. Tradition of insinuations is not new in the Parliament. What comes under privilege motion and what not is political party’s privilege to claim. Most of the times they decide just for shake of deciding though the issue may be a normal one. When there is nothing substantial to engage with such trivial matters assume prominence. This issue has no importance for me or for the interest of the citizens who expect decency, commitment to people’s cause, and interest in national cause from their elected representatives.
Rahul Gandhi’s feeling of insult by the caste remarks of Anurag Thakur and additionally the issue of caste census are serious matters. Anurag Thakur has no right to insult, even indirectly, to Rahul Gandhi, who for the first time is assigned with the responsibility of the Leader of Opposition. He belongs to the dynasty of Prime Ministers, but not Anurag Thakur. He has dignity, and his ego is hurt. It is a different thing that Rahul hurts and insults others, it is a different thing that what he speaks is interpreted by his courtiers to give meaning. And he has inherited the tradition from the dynasty. Anurag Thakur should remember that Rahul’s ancestor insulted Sita Ram Kesari , Jaga Jivan Ram and several others. His mother named Modi as the maut ki saudagar. Rahul himself tore the draft bill shown by Dr. Manmohan Singh. He has the right to say anything about anybody on any issue, even though he does not understand what he says or does. Anurag Thakur does not inherit the dynastic characteristic of insulting. Obviously, it was an insult to Rahul.
It is also Anurag Thaku’s ignorance to ask about Rahul’s caste. Rahul is casteless. Caste is an Indian social system. His grandfather was Parsi Muslim. His mother is catholic. His supporters portray him as Dattatreya Gotra, a Kashmir Brahmin. Anurag Thakur has no research on the ancestry of Feroz Khan Gandy, a Parsi Muslim, to establish whether Parsi Muslims are Kashmir Brahmins. Rahul Gandhi is a Shiva Bhakta and a devout Hindu during elections. When he himself is confused to understand his caste and the caste system in Indian context, it is the arrogance and ignorance of Thakur to ask him. To ask Rahul about his caste is to remind him “A guilty conscience needs no accuser”. Thakur has hurt his conscience which is always overflowed with guilty consciousness!
Whether one asks or not, whether one admits or not, caste is a predominant factor in Indian politics. The media do not forget a single day to mention caste dynamics related to any event. If someone was raped, the ghastly incident of rape fades away under the provocation of caste dimension. The candidates are selected on the basis of caste percentage dominant in a constituency. Everywhere there is caste. As if caste is the only goal to talk about! Ironically, the spirit of Constitution is not caste based. What the government does is always against the Constitution in the eyes of the opposition, and what opposition does is also against the Constitution in the eyes of the Constitution. When every political party is working against the Constitution, then what is the need of the Constitution? Or Are everyone in the blame game to confuse the public and fish out of muddy water?
Mallikarjun Kharge laments, “ Yes, I am a tribal, but I don’t know how many we are. Yes, I am an OBC, but I don’t know how many we are. Today, we all need to assess how much our participation is in the progress of this country”. The question is whether caste census aims to determine the level of deprivation or the level of participation. What’s about his role in the accumulation of wealth which could have been shared among his caste fellows? Members have contradictory opinions to befool the people. Let us see how we are fooled. An OBC today is a tribe or SC tomorrow. A general caste today is an OBC tomorrow. All these categories are not based on India’s occupation based traditional caste system. But the issue of marginalization is linked with the traditional division! Irony is that OBC is Other Backward Class, but SC is Scheduled Caste. An ST is not a caste. Whither is ST in caste based census? Will they be left out or designated as caste?
An individual is born to a particular caste according to our caste system. He or she is made OBC, SC, and General by the Administration. In SC or OBC category there are several individual castes or communities experiencing the same problems which these categories allege in their relations with general caste group. How much the claim of generic OBC or SC identity will take care of the problems which their component communities face? If the general identity will resolve individual community’s problems, why the same problems cannot be solved with a caste-less Indian identity? An SC caste, for example, must have a different perspective towards a community in OBC category. The perspective may be the one what defines belonging to different social groups. The perspective may be one of privileged and under privileged. How can this mind set towards the community change when the government declares the community SC? If the impression one holds against the other changes due to mere change in the category-designation why not the same should happen in case of all communities as one social category, i.e. the Indians? Where is the logic except emotional exploitation of people in the name of caste and community?
When the caste census will be taken, obviously the enumerator will ask the caste of an individual. What will be the reaction of the individual at that time? Before asking the caste and knowing the possible reaction it is imperative to experiment. Everyone knows that Parliament is a laboratory of democracy. Is there any better place to experiment the reaction of an individual on the question of his/her caste? Anurag Thakur has rightly cracked the nut.
Caste is at the very core of Indian politics. A leader is identified as caste leader. Unless the caste of the leader is not known who he or she will lead then? But perhaps it will be blasphemy and anti-constitutional to declare that India’s politics is caste based, or not based on the principle of people’s democracy. Politicians know it, live in it, but dare not to admit openly. It is time to call a spade a spade. Why it is an issue about the caste of Rahul Gandhi? If he has a caste, he should declare it, if he does not have one that also he has to declare. Why befooling the people? What is the harm if he is a Muslim or Christian? Indians do not mind the caste if one is above board and efficient. Nobody asked the caste of APJ Abdul Kalam or Zakr Hussain or asks Sonia Gandhi as it is known. But why so confusion about Rahul’s caste? Why double standard? When one hides something it is beyond doubt that one works on the hidden agenda. And obviously Rahul Gandhi has. He contradicts the tradition and convention of the Congress for the reasons he knows. He denounces everything that is the heritage of India. I do not understand why Congressis justify his stupidity. Cannot they think of Congress without Gandhi family? And this Gandhi designation is also spurious. How long the Congfressis will keep on feeding spurious ideology to the countrymen? A known evil is better to handle than an untried and unpredictable god man like Rahul!
It is seen that when bad days come in the life of a nation, stupid leaders emerge; they befool people, keep them confused, and exploit their trust to satisfy vested interest. India is a half victim of the emerging evil power due to stupid politicians.
Caste has been a curse. The British used it and accentuated relational dynamics with the aim of dividing and ruling the country. We are Indians. Our system did not start with the British. There is no denying to the fact that every system has its merits and demerits. Cannot we cure our legs to bear the weight of our body; or should we depend on other’s legs to put our weight? Is the system effective crying over caste? Why there are so many problems based on caste? Why most of the communities demand reservation on caste basis? Why reservation has not benefitted the mass except creating elite from within the group who are equally after fulfilling self-interest like elites of any other caste? Elites and politicians have their own interest which they fulfil by confusing the mass and exploiting caste sentiment. The cause for which reservation was accorded to SC and ST exists in every community in different degrees. This has given rise to diverse problems of the country with ‘caste consideration’ at the core. It is now time to amend the constitution to label one anti-national, politician or commoner, who thinks community development on caste basis as it causes national problems. It is now time to define community, individual, or regional development without the caste criterion as the foundation. Caste should be delinked from nation’s development; it should play the social rule of stability and harmony. Development should be for all and eradication of problems should also be for all. It has become a custom to invoke caste in every event or incident. Media should keep restrain from sayin that an SC or ST is tortured, for it keeps caste hatred alive. Rather we should say that a human is tortured, murdered; a woman is raped, etc. Change in perspective will work wonder with the change of vocabularies.
The truth is in front of us. When the question of deprivation, marginalization, poverty, etc. is raised, the finger is instantly pointed at SC and ST communities. Why? This is because they have not developed as expected. The caste-based reservation policy has not benefitted the castes! There are misuses of reservation benefit by several members of the creamy layer, because they have resource, network, power, and information as compared to non-creamy layer people. They also have access to quality education. The recent case of Puja Khedkar is a burning example, an eye opener to think of the issue. Thousands of cases happen behind the curtain which does not come to the lime light.
The logic behind caste-based reservation might have its own merit at the time when decision was taken. But over the years, it has proved wrong. Class formation has taken place among reserved communities and within the community also. On an average, all tribes are not equally benefitted from reservation policy; some are more benefitted than others. This discrepancy led to carving out Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups from the ST category in 1973 during Fifth Five Year Plan as per the recommendations of The Debar Commission (1960-61). The lacuna in caste based reservation on the assumption that SCs and STs are homogenous classes was visible before 1960s! Instead of re-looking the policy, the efforts are directed to extend the caste-based policy over time and space which yields unexpected results.
This is also evident in the ruling of the Supreme Court of India on 01 August 2024. The ruling is significant in that it recognizes the lacuna in caste-based reservation as it permits sub-categories within SC and ST Categotries for reservation. The SC ruling reads that ‘the states must identify the “creamy layer” within SC and ST categories and exclude them from quota benefits’. The SC recognizes that the SC and ST categories do not form the “homogenous classes”.
Caste-based reservation is criticized because the caste, as is presented in post colonial India, is not India’s pre-colonial heritage. It is colonial legacy; Nicholas B. Dirks in his monumental work Castes of Mind has elaborated its colonial origin. The Punjab and Haryana High Court on 28 March 2019 also observed that caste system does not have profound social, intellectual, and scientific base and is against the basic tenets of the Constitution. The similar observation is made on 01 August 2024 by a Supreme Court judge. Justice Pankaj Mittal observed that in primitive India there was no existence of any caste system. Justice Mittal suggested that the policy of reservation as enshrined in the Constitution of India requires a fresh re-look and evolvement of other methods for the upliftment of deprived sections of the population. Obviously, the criterion is suggested from outside the caste consideration.
After 70 years of tryst with reservation, incidence of deprivation in SC and ST communities, and demand for other communities under SC, ST and OBC categories imply that the caste based reservation is a flawed criterion. Besides, the development approach in general and development of SCs and STs in particular need fresh re-look. While reservation is a crucial strategy to uplift the marginalized people, linkage of marginalization to caste base after 70 years of experiment appears to be a reading of vested interests. The purpose of this paper is not to advocate for the abolition of reservation, but to plead for an alternative approach to uplift the deprived population and their proper identification in true sense. The point is how effectively reservation can be managed to achieve the goal.
Another question comes to mind and needs attention. Whom does caste-based reservation policy benefit? Definitely the politicians and the creamy layer people are benefitted. The creamy layer and the advanced communities under reservation category will be deprived of the benefit on which they monopolize because of their advantaged position. Politicians will lose vote bank if reservation considers criterion other than the caste. That is why vested interest politicians are hell-bent for caste census. Were they interested for the upliftment of the deprived population, they would have argued in favour of reservation on the basis of socio-economic indices; they would have demanded to know where does the caste-based reservation policy go wrong. But unfortunately, they do not see anything other than their interests. Is the country safe in the hands of the politicians who see the country as an entity of castes, and caste as milching cow to feed them?
(The author is Formerly Professor at Rajiv Gandhi University and Dean of Cultural Studies at Central University of Jharkhand; views are his own)
