As a liberal, practicing Hindu, I read Thenmozhi Soundararajan and Sinthujan Varatharajah’s “Caste Privilege 101: A Primer for the Privileged” with interest. Let me start by acknowledging what the authors get right — invisible caste privilege, not-solely-Brahmin perpetrators, and the artificiality of South Asianness. Moreover, the authors’ palpable pain deserves a hearing from upper caste, lower caste, and non-casted individuals alike. If the goal however is to abolish caste privilege, I would like to engage with their approach, which I think is strategically in error.
The authors begin with the following graf:
Look. It’s time that we South Asians of the diaspora call out caste. Every issue that we might want to understand better and address — whether it is indigenous rights of the First Nations … — will not be possible if caste is not dismantled. (emphasis mine)
and again just a few paragraphs later:
It is time that those who are Savarna, or Upper-caste, begin to learn to name and own their privilege and take on the burden of educating and dismantling caste in your own families and social networks. (emphasis mine)
The Hindu American Foundation’s 2011 caste report (full disclosure: I’m a member of the executive council, but did not write the report) came to a different conclusion: caste-based discrimination and birth-based occupation are the problem, not caste itself. Why the distinction? Because Jaati (i.e. endogamous community, which is what most of us mean by “caste”, and how Soundararajan and Varatharajah use it), is more than just hierarchical position. The Iyer community/Jaati has features true of many of its members: a value for vegetarianism, patronage of Bharatnatyam and Carnatic music, a specific pronunciation of Tamil (including substituting the Sanskrit “श” for the Tamil “ச”). Likewise, the Chettiar community/Jaati has its own unique (Chettinad) cuisine, home design patterns, and worship modes.
Are Iyers and Chettiars to give up the above? Would doing so end caste privilege? Are the authors willing to surrender their hard won food decisions, or value for Ambedkar, in the service of eradicating caste? Of course not. “We need to end caste” is born of noble sentiment, but it runs into the real problem that castes — subcultures — are historical repositories of India’s incomprehensibly vast diversity. It is much more fruitful to focus on treating one another with respect regardless of subculture — and I agree with Soundararajan and Varatharajah that we should be personally responsible for forcefully pushing our loved ones in this direction — and enacting norms and laws against discrimination in schools, work environments, and not least in places of worship, than to attempt homogenization. This kind of pluralism is exactly what Hinduism executes brilliantly with respect to regionalism in places where inter-regional prejudices have eroded, including in the diaspora.
Of course, Soundararajan and Varatharajah consider Hinduism “not a safe space for us, as we are not recognized equal before god.” But this argument buys into the very casteist structure they decry, and mistakes venality for doctrine. In reality, “Hinduism=caste-based discrimination” is at odds with the historical moment, when much of the energy of Hindu reformers for the last 300 years has been spent reaffirming how utterly irrelevant caste — and caste-based discrimination — is to Hinduism. Vedanta, Yoga, Ahimsa, the Gita, Bhakti — none of these depend even remotely on caste. Swami Vivekananda, Dayananda Saraswati, Mahatma Gandhi, Bharatiar all spent considerable time fighting caste-based discrimination, if not always caste itself. India’s constitution outlawed caste-based discrimination and created the most extensive system of affirmative action in the world; drafted by Dr. Ambedkar, it was voted on and approved by a parliament that consisted overwhelmingly of devout Hindus.
And Hindu belief and history is filled with venerated figures from both extremes of the caste hierarchy — Valmiki was a tribal robber before he wrote the Ramayan; Veda Vyasa, the son of a fisherwoman, compiled the Vedas; Guha and Sabari were revered Nishadas who helped Rama; Kannapa was a hunter who proved his devotion to Shiva by placing his foot on the Shiva Lingam; the Reddy dynasty was founded by a herdsman. It is simply not true that doctrinal Hinduism in any way requires caste-based discrimination — or even caste-based hierarchy. Attempts in the past to eradicate Jaati have been failures, often resulting in the formation of new castes which themselves are situated at the top of the hierarchy — Virshaivites (Lingayats) in particular come to mind.
I want to be explicit — the above is not in any way an endorsement of caste. There are many ways of cultivating sustainable subcultures; caste is far from the best one. Many people, myself included, find Jaati anachronistic and irrelevant. If any of us were designing Hindu/South Asian society today from scratch, caste would not likely be the path chosen. But in the world we inhabit, ancient Hindu/South Asian society coalesced tribe by tribe, Jaati by Jaati, and the fastest route to reducing caste privilege does not lie in awaiting or working towards their dissolution.
I found a lot to think about in the authors’ piece, and I hope they will likewise take the time to read the HAF report on caste-based discrimination. I doubt very much that we will agree about all potential solutions, but we certainly agree that there is a problem, and I think it can be the start of interrogating not just caste privilege, but caste-based discrimination as a key player in perpetuating that privilege and its attendant inequality.
* * *
Raman Khanna is an academic physician and member of the Hindu American Foundation, where he serves on the executive council.
Okay, first of all, just to be clear, many of the arguments that Khanna makes are already demolished by Ambedkar in his reply to Gandhi’s reply to the Annihilation of Caste essay. And secondly, it’s an open secret that Hindu American Foundation is a closeted right-wing organization masquerading as a bi-partisan human rights organization, on the lines of the closet-Zionist ADL. (http://www.coalitionagainstgenocide.org/reports/2013/cag.15dec2013.haf.rss.pdf).
Having said that, many of the things Khanna says are the same old tropes that savarnas keep saying: how we should keep caste but do away with caste discrimination, how caste is just multiculturalism, etc. This was the same gas-lighting argument that was thrown at Ambedkar by the high-caste leaders in early twentieth century. Ambedkar replied, “The Out-caste is a bye-product of the Caste-system. There will be out-castes as long as there are castes. Nothing can emancipate the Out-caste except the destruction of the Caste-system.” .
Ambedkar and many younger Dalits have also categorically demolished savarna arguments that seek to project caste as a quaint harmless cultural practice, and instead theorized it as operating in the same way as race in USA: a system of social stratification and entitlements. HAF became famous after the California textbook controversy in which a couple of right wing Hindu organizations tried to get sections removed from history textbooks that alluded to the oppressive nature of caste discrimination, leading a Dalit group to report that the organizations were trying to further “a view of Indian history that softens…the violent truth of caste-based discrimination in India” This agenda of white-washing the very ugly history of caste in South Asia also comes through this article by Khanna.
When he says that caste-discrimination can end if we just start respecting each other, he is very cleverly ignoring the fact that caste is not just about interpersonal communication, but is a systemic issue that has real economic and political consequences. Just like Blacks are over-represented in American prisons and poverty , Dalits are also overrepresented in Indian prisons as well as in low socioeconomic sections.
I think it’s time we actually started listening to Dalits when we want to hear on caste, instead of privileging the savarna interpretation of caste. Round Table India (http://roundtableindia.co.in/) is a great site maintained by young Dalit writers.
Oh, and as for Khanna’s story about how Hindu reformers and revivalists were deeply concerned about untouchables during the 19th century, that thing had more to do with politics (which Ambedkar talks about in his book “What Congress and Gandhi Have Done to the Untouchables”). During this period, a lot of untouchables had started converting to other religions to escape the scourge of caste. To summarize it, I am just going to quote Arundhati Roy from her essay ( http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/doctor-and-saint ) coz I am too lazy to write:
The untouchable castes were entered under the accounting head “Hindu.” (In 1930, according to Ambedkar, the untouchables numbered about 44.5 million.27 The population of African Americans in the United States around the same time was 8.8 million.) The large-scale exodus of untouchables from the Hindu fold would have been catastrophic for the “Hindu” majority. In pre-partition, undivided Punjab, for example, between 1881 and 1941, the Hindu population dropped from 43.8 percent to 29.1 percent, due largely to the conversion of the subordinated castes to Islam, Sikhism and Christianity. Hindu reformers hurried to stem this migration …… Conservative Hindu organisations like the Hindu Mahasabha took the task beyond rhetoric, and against their own deeply held beliefs and practice began to proselytise energetically against untouchability. Untouchables had to be prevented from defecting. They had to be assimilated, their proteins broken down. They had to be brought into the big house, but kept in the servants’ quarters.
Dear Gilligan,
Thank you for your comment. I strongly disagree with your characterization of HAF as a “right wing Hindu group”. See for example our stances on gay rights and of course, on caste discrimination–deeply informed by our faith.
http://hafsite.org/haf-concerned-about-anti-gay-legislation-uganda
http://www.hafsite.org/media/pr/not-cast-caste-big-picture-and-executive-summary
As to CAG, you would do well to read the primary material–as in our publicly documented statements–rather than relying on the truth-challenged claims of a shadowy, strident, one-issue shell organization:
http://www.hafsite.org/media/pr/coalition-against-genocide-cag-exposed
Now to your actual points. HAF largely agrees with Soundararajan and Varatharajah on the goal of ending caste privilege and discrimination. What we disagree about–respectfully–is strategy. Caste itself, in our eyes, is intrinsically neither good nor bad, and we have no problem with those who ignore it in their personal and social lives. (Many of us, myself included, fall into this category.) Conversely, many caste practices including choices of food, dress, music, and so on are culturally neutral–not counting, of course, those that involve discriminating against those of other castes–and many if not most people are intensely attached to their choices. We have no problem with this either, and trying to detach people from these practices is likely to encounter such intense resistance–including among Dalits who have preserved many of their traditions through severe ostracism–as to be counterproductive to the goal of ending caste-based discrimination.
One final point. In quoting Arundhati Roy, you point out that Hindus reformers adjusted their religious beliefs to try to keep Dalits within the fold. While this is not completely true–see any of Vivekananda’s collected works, or for that matter those of Basava several centuries prior, to get a sense for the real empathy animating their disgust with casteism–in the real world this is part of how religion and culture actually do evolve in response to pressure internal and external. Catholicism evolved to compete with Protestantism; American policy evolved to reduce the appeal of Marxism among blacks in the Jim Crow South during the height of the Cold War. Ultimately, regardless of the motivations of the originators of these reforms, subsequent generations were bequeathed a better world in which blatantly corrupt indulgences and legally enshrined racism were significantly mitigated. (For that matter, see Lincoln and his original reasons for opposing slavery–and how these evolved once the Civil War began.) The same is true of attempts to end caste-based discrimination, which yields a better world regardless of what motivated long-dead reformers.
Best,
Raman
Gilligan, what is making you so upset regarding caste based reform movements within Hinduism? Let’s assume that the ONLY reason Hinduism tried, and continues to try, to reform itself to address ills associated with caste is because it sees a threat to its existence–isn’t that a good thing? The practitioners were, and are, incented to respond in a manner that you presumably find appropriate (work towards abolition of caste based privileges–let people into the big house). Unlike the Reformation, this process occurred without causing mass long-term civilian slaughter. In a similar vein, the Mormon leadership had a “revelation” in the late 1970’s (yes, LESS than 40 years ago) that “gasp!” blacks could be part of the faith once it appeared they were having some trouble making inroads in countries where the darkies lived (sarcasm fully intended). The Catholic church quietly decided that a heliocentric universe (and I am sure you are aware that they had previously killed for that kind of thinking) was okay when it was in danger of becoming irrelevant as an authority in the face of conclusive science on the matter. But perhaps you are one of those people that believes a faith must remain unchanged from some crystallized point in time (in which case I guess you’re on board with that whole “Shias aren’t really Muslim” perspective).
I hear you on the evils that have arisen as a result of that system and how those evils continue to perpetuated. For a parallel, an application of the tenets of Christianity gave rise to some pretty horrific and systemic anti-Semitism–presume you’re not on board with that (I wasn’t quite sure from your comments)?
I also hear you on the need to hear the voices of the disenfranchised. I am suspicious as to whether you are one of them. But for the “Zionist” comment, your talking points sound an awful like the open secret that is the recently energized right-wing Evangelical “go forth and civilize those savages in Asia before the Muslims and Catholics get them all” movement; but then again, it has been said that if you go left enough on the spectrum you end up on the right.
As for the textbook issue, I don’t think authorities should whitewash the ills of Indian society that did/do occur due to the interpretation and application of Hindu tenets, BUT ONLY if all other faiths are subject to the same scrutiny. So, can you point me to a 6th grade California textbook that mentions how Christianity was, and continues to be, directly responsible for anti-Semitism in Europe and the Americas and how that anti-Semitism directly contributed to the torture and killing of 6 million Jews (we’ll leave out the genocide of those pesky heathen Natives for this round)? What about Islam’s condoning of, if not outright justification for, slavery and the slave trade (your “big house” reference suggests that is a subject dear to your heart)? I’ve got some thoughts on Judaism as well but I suspect you may already have notes on that topic. I’m not even going to touch the issues of how the beliefs of other faiths adversely impacted Indian society, let’s just focus on “Western” society for now.
Nonetheless, despite my suspiciousness of your motives, I do thank you for the link to the voices of the Dalit writers –always good to be aware of multiple perspectives.
Completely agree with Gilligan’s response to this article, which is trying to whitewash the oppression of caste system. First, it is the existence of the caste itself that is the cause of thousands of years of oppression of dalits. Caste was designed to oppress and is continued to be practised for that same purpose. Not to preserve any culture. That the author falsely claims that Bharatanatyam is the culture of certain ‘upper’ (read oppressive) castes, shows his little or even no knowledge of history of caste oppression. Bharatanatyam itself is a highly appropriated version of Sadir natyam, the dance of Devadasis. The devadasis are literally temple slaves. They are forced into such misogynistic services of upper castes, who in turn stole their dance and called it their own. Bharatanatyam is a classic example of how caste oppression and appropriation operate in India. They steal the culture of the oppressed castes, call it their own and make it inaccessible to the true owners. The devadasi system itself is now outlawed for its misogynistic oppression of devadasi women by the ‘upper’ castes. Most from the community are continued to be discriminated upon by the oppressive castes and opt into sex work, as all other avenues of work are closed for them. The so called ‘cultures’ of different oppressive castes are nothing but the labour of oppressed castes. The different proud identities of ‘upper’ castes are there to discriminate and segregate the oppressed castes. The shameless pride in their oppressive caste identities, the shameless search for brides and grooms within their own communities while claiming they do not discriminate on basis caste, is nothing but the continuation of segregation and discrimination. So to claim that it is caste discrimination but not caste itself that needs to be annihilated is both dubious and a very privileged response. Caste itself is the power-structure that needs to be annihilated as it is one of the oldest and worst forms of oppressive systems in the world, that continues to mix and evolve with other oppressive power-structures.
And yeah, a quick look at the ‘California textbook controversy’ wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_textbook_controversy_over_Hindu_history) clearly shows that the Hindu American Foundation was just trying to whitewash the oppression of women and the ‘lower castes’ by the caste system. A shame that such a biased article that goes against all known historical facts on caste system and oppression, from a mostly privileged caste group, is allowed as a response to a radical and brilliant article arguing for annihilation of the evil caste system. But then, ‘balance’ right?
Dear Dharma,
I want to engage with your points, but I’m really not sure how since you accuse me–counterfactually–of whitewashing the oppression of women and the lower castes. I acknowledged both in my first and last paragraphs, and in my response to Gilligan, and I agree with the goal of ending caste based privilege and discrimination. I also agreed that historically disadvantaged castes have suffered significantly. My point was, and remains, that many castes–historically disadvantaged castes included–tend to value the culture that their caste preserves. (Here’s one of the more obvious examples from the Dalit community):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1xI-uX1NGY
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/28800367_Transforming_Dalit_Identity_Ancient_Drum_Beat_New_Song
Indians, like all humans, tend to resist cultural homogenization imposed upon them, especially when their culture as a whole feels only marginally related to the actual oppression. If we want to end oppression, I am questioning the strategy of actively working to eradicate caste, rather than more fruitfully enacting short and long term measures to eliminate economic and social inequality between castes. The overall goal of ending discrimination is one I share. And if the overall goal is in fact the end of the caste system itself, I don’t disagree with that goal either–I just think it likely to be a counterproductive waste of time, given that though caste hierarchy is on the wane–even in villages:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vB9jrjjqQnk
…caste itself is stronger than ever. Perhaps the solution is to settle for equality rather than homogenization/realignment.
Best,
Raman
Yes, I still accuse you of “counterfactually–of whitewashing the oppression of women and the lower castes. ” Again, it shows your ignorance of your own privilege, when you point out to dalits reclaiming their culture is similar to oppressive castes preserving their hegemonic identities. Reclaiming is when the oppressed proudly proclaim the culture and characteristics of their community, when that same culture is looked down upon by those who oppress. I’ll give you examples since you do not understand the difference between dalits reclaiming their invisibilized culture and the oppressive castes shamelessly proclaiming their hegemonic identities. Women reclaiming the words used to insult them, like “bitch” etc. You heard of “slut-walks” I hope. The LGBTQ communities across the globe, reclaiming their identity through “Pride” events. I also hope that you are one of those,”why do black people get to use the ‘N’ word, but it’s racist when others use it?” Either way, the answer is to that privileged question is, reclaiming!
Coming to the oppressed castes, they did not choose to be named, segregated and discriminated by the use of caste identities. Those identities are forced upon them. They always had their unique culture. But that culture was co opted, appropriated while being demeaned at the same time. If you even follow any historical facts about India, be it archaeology, linguistics or anthropology they show that caste is not a natural classification, but was designed with the intention to discriminate. The caste names that are given to the oppressed, are used as insults among the oppressive castes. Hence, when dalits and other oppressed groups proudly proclaim their identity, they are reclaiming their identity from the hands of the oppressors. Where as, when the oppressive castes proclaim their caste identity with pride, they are continuing the oppression. When a white person claims they are proud of their white race, it is nothing but racist white supremacy. There is justice and a sense of power in the oppressed groups reclaiming their identities. When the oppressive groups do it, it is nothing but the assertion of their oppressive status.
You grouping all Indians together while saying that “tend to resist cultural homogenization imposed upon them,” as if they are equals. The “cultural homogenization” is being imposed upon the oppressed groups, by fundamentalist terrorist organizations like the RSS and their BJP government in power. That is not to say that the Congress governments were any less guilty of trying to uphold the caste status quo. Hope the the Hindu American Foundation is not associated with the RSS in anyway.
So you saying that it is caste discrimination, but not caste itself that should be annihilated, is dead wrong. It is not only wrong, wanting caste to continue is wanting the caste oppression to continue. Oppressed castes get beaten up and even killed for trying to reclaim their caste. It is because the oppressive castes do not want to lose their privileged status and are ready to defend it even by murder, like they have done for centuries. So don’t go on telling the oppressed castes what is the right path. Nobody is interested for bread crumbs of equality thrown at them. Total equality is the end goal and it can only be achieved by the annihilation of caste.
If you are really interested like you claim, in understanding what the original article that you replied to and what I am trying to say here, I suggest you read Ambedkar’s THE ANNIHILATION OF CASTE http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/ambedkar/web/readings/aoc_print_2004.pdf, to understand why it is necessary to annihilate caste and his CASTES IN INDIA: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/txt_ambedkar_castes.html, to understand the reasons for origin and continuation of caste oppression.
Ah, to be Giligan and Dharma…smear HAF because, damn it, can’t engage Dr. Khanna’s incredibly articulate points on their merits. Then fall back on my own radical tropes: revolution! inquilab! social justice! power and privilege! I’ll fix society by upending it….end capitalism, end Hinduism and finally, finally, we’ll end caste. So Dr. Khanna offers an alternative to that radical, Arundhatiesque fantasy and now he’s a right wing interloper trying to “whitewash” whatever!
Folks, caste based discrimination is a social evil that must be eradicated, and Hindus from Narsinh Mehta to Vivekananda to Dayananda to Chinmayananda were unsparing in their condemnation of casteism, as are the religious leaders today http://www.hafsite.org/media/pr/statements-caste-hindu-leaders.
Annihilating caste is a wonderful slogan, and us NRI’s happily ensconced in the so-civilized West can pine for a caste-less society–who would disagree? Heck, Arundhati in her prime “upscale Jor Bagh” apartment next to Lodi Gardens agrees. But first try telling Uttar Pradesh’s Mayawati or Bihar’s Jitan Ram Manjhi that you want their jaati’s/castes to be dismantled and derecognized. Until then, work with Dr. Khanna who says that caste based discrimination DOES exist, and that it must be ended by working together!
So just because your types are so generous in even accepting that caste based discrimination exists, the oppressed castes should bow to your generosity and follow your prescribed path at ‘reforming’ inequality. The fight against caste will be on the terms of the oppressed classes not on the terms of the oppressors or the beneficiaries of oppression.
FYI, Arundati Roy belongs to your ilk, the upper caste saviors who want reform on their terms. To think that the oppressed castes want to follow her, means that you are not even listening to their voices. May be you or Gilligan aren’t aware of the opposition(http://roundtableindia.co.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7942:the-colonization-of-ambedkar&catid=119:feature&Itemid=132) to Arundati Roy’s appropriation of Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste, from which Gilligan even quoted. Have you heard of Ambedkar? You can go on trying to dismiss and diminish the fight of the oppressed castes to annihilate caste. You all are doing exactly what the original article (http://theaerogram.com/caste-privilege-caste-based-discrimination-caste/#comment-1668) educates against. But then your privilege is preventing you from understanding the urgency of annihilating caste. I can’t even tell if you are doing this consciously or unwittingly.
I myself am a very privileged savarna, benefitting from both the past and present forms of caste discrimination in India. The least one could do is to first accept that privilege and listen to the voices of the oppressed, instead of trying to act savior. You refer to all those so called reformers, who wanted to continue the age old regressive caste system. The answer to eradicate all ‘upper’ caste pride is to read Ambedkar. Get out your privileged ancient well and listen to the more progressive voices of dalits. The dalit bahujan activism is the most progressive movement in India and it would benefit all the oppressive castes a lot, to listen to them. They are the ones who fight for the dignity and equality of all oppressed groups. Not you or Dr.Khanna.
“Until then, work with Dr. Khanna who says that caste based discrimination DOES exist, and that it must be ended by working together!” sums up your entire argument. No thanks, even from a fellow savarna. I will keep listening and amplifying the voices of the oppressed, instead of trying to act as an oppressive savior like you and Arundati.
Annihilate caste!
Jai Bhim
Dear Dharma,
I’m sorry you perceive this post as a diktat, when it is really meant to open a conversation about strategy. The goal–a world where people are not discriminated against for their caste, race, sex, etc.–is I believe mutual. Perhaps it is not the end goal for you, but I presume it IS a goal?
In pursuit of said goal, different strategies have their strengths and weaknesses. So for example, a world in which there is no caste would have no caste-based discrimination! But such a world is so far from our own, that I wonder if caste-based discrimination could be achieved sooner, and more realistically, by being approached a different way.
As I have pointed out repeatedly, I hold no brief with caste itself. I, like many in the diaspora, have benefited from porous Jaati boundaries. But I don’t pretend to be the norm, particularly in rural India.
You tend to mix hyperbolic and content-free arguments with ad hominem attacks; perhaps a useful exercise would be to make specific claims about what can be done to achieve our goals. I am ready to suggest several specific things, see for example here:
http://www.hafsite.org/media/pr/not-cast-caste-hafs-hopes-future
What, precisely, are your suggestions for proactively ending caste? Is it to force intermarriage? Or perhaps to kill off all upper castes Indians? I’m waiting for something concrete and substantive. In the interim, I encourage you to read this piece by John McWhorter:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/15/the-privilege-of-checking-white-privilege.html
I don’t agree with everything he says–I think recognizing your privilege is a useful way of understanding whether your ideas, thoughts, and beliefs are grounded in ALL reality or just your own–but he makes a great case for why smirking guiltily about privilege any time someone critiques your ideas or strategies is not helpful if the end goal is actually leveling the playing field.
Note also that he does not state anywhere that the only solution to racism is the elimination of race.
GWN and CasteAway, thank you both also for your earlier comments.
Best,
Raman
“The critique of caste by caste Hindus, therefore, was a strategic act to perpetuate upper-caste dominance.” http://roundtableindia.co.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8099&catid=129&Itemid=195
Dharma….you need to do a bit of original thinking and, perhaps, cease citing the words of others as proxy for your own. And please, can we get past the sloganeering–annihilate caste? To even critique caste is to perpetuate dominance? Really? I’m fine with you celebrating Dalit writers and deifying Ambedkar with your “Jai Bhim” mantra japa. But if you’re going to engage seriously on this issue, you need to , augment your reading list. You’re hardly the first enlightened, “privileged savarna” to examine caste.
And it would help if you quit hiding behind your rather flamboyant ideal of annihilation and spell out what it really means to you. Do you truly understand the nuance of Ambedkar’s concept of caste annihilation, or do you also trumpet the views of the discredited hate-monger Kancha Ilaiah. This is an important difference, and you need to declare your position. For if you stand with Kancha, annihilation of caste is simply the end of Hinduism. So go ahead, dharma, just say, “Hinduism must die for caste to die, because Hinduism would not exist without caste.” That is the Kancha position. And, yeah, good luck with that.
Kancha’s screeds simply lack the gravitas and intellectual capacity to elide the subtle difference between his position and that of Ambedkar. In his call for equality, liberty and fraternity, Ambedkar did not discount the Upanishads as a source for inspiration. To Ambedkar, Hinduism had to be more than scripture and Ambedkar wanted Hindus to discard a rule based, “Shastric” centered religion and live a life on “principles” that could be articulated and derived from scripture.
Dharma, Ambedkar wanted an end to caste based on an erroneous conflation of Hinduism with caste. If you took a moment to read the statements of Hindu religious leaders I helpfully cited for you, you’d see that Ambedkar’s fear was misplaced. He reserved special vile for the Manu Smriti, which dharma, you’ll be happy to know, is completely rejected by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad http://vhp.org/featured-article/vhps-view-of-manu-smriti-and-other-smritis. I’m sure you’ll go sign up and become a member.
Ambedkar did not understand that the Sruti’s of Hindu tradition have no role for a birth-based hierarchy, and he erroneously translated the Sanskrit “guna” as “worth.” But I won’t quibble with an intellectual giant posthumously.
Dharma, if your solution to caste privilege and casteism is to annihilate Hinduism, then go embrace whatever you like, and let me know how that works out for you. But if you want to engage with those that are not lost in fantasy and engaging in the present, read also the works of Dalit thought leaders and actual doers like Chandra Bhan Prasad or JNU’s Abhinav Prakash Singh http://swarajyamag.com/politics/new-deal-for-dalits/ . And when you take a moment from your daily self-flagellations for the sin of being born a savarna–in your own words–read Prasad’s book on how Dalits are empowering themselves and using entrepreneurship as the vehicle for upliftment https://casi.sas.upenn.edu/defying-the-odds
I know, I know, it goes against the whole Marxist, utopian, kill Hinduism thing, but dammit, could capitalism be what eventually kills caste?
Right, go ahead and cite Right wing organizations like HAF and violent Hindutva terrorists like VHP to back your regressive arguments. Good luck with that!
Annihilate caste!
Jai Bhim
Jai Phule
Since I cannot “do a bit of original thinking.” I will continue to cite dalit activists.
The “Brahmin” is essentially the inventor of caste and this term applies to all the oppressive caste in the below citation.
“This post is the first of my series on The Brahmin Problem.
Situation One: India is poor. No, Indians are poor. No, no, some Indians are poor.
Stage 1: India has to be seen as modern. Need to identify the poor. The poor cannot self identify as poor. Because the Brahmin knows the poor are greedy, and will claim more than they deserve. Only the Brahmin can do this job. So Brahmin creates opportunities for Brahmins to identify the poor.
.
.
.
Brahmin Problem: Elimination of poverty, Annihilation of Caste and such would take away the Brahmin’s capacity to keep creating opportunities for himself. You see, one identified poor SC/ST/OBC individual ensures lifetime opportunities for several tiers of high paying jobs for Brahmin brotherhood. Such are the existential dilemmas of the Brahmins in modern times.”
Read this blog post here: https://castory.wordpress.com/2015/03/04/the-brahmin-problem/
Annihilate caste!
and yeah, definitely annihilate capitalism!
Annihilate patriarchy!
Jai Bhim
Jai Phule