Caste politics and the future of BSP
SEMINARIST
IMAGINE a society where 10% of the people are self-appointed Brokers
of God – who thus occupy the top social slot. Another 10% are held to
be born-to-rule, who do little else for a living except to appropriate
for themselves the right to rule, all the time decorously holding the
ornate sword and enjoying the exclusive right to ride the white horse,
but never fight themselves – as Brokers of War, they employ 'other
backward castes' to be their fighting foot-soldiers. Yet another 10%
just buy and sell, traders sitting on their backside to make money out
of worker's sweat.
Add to the above, two sets of 40% and 30% respectively, the working
backbone of old Indian society – who however have been historically at
loggerheads with each other. The first set of 40% are the hardy
farmers who hold the plough – but who also become either respectable
foot-soldiers of state power or goonish lathaits of feudal landlord
power.
The other are the bottom 30%, who as artisans are the original working
class of India, the tillers of land, cobblers, blacksmiths,
silversmiths, goldsmiths, ironsmiths, potters, weavers, carpenters,
barbers, sweepers, and so on – the whole gamut of human working
activity. Without this working class, the remaining 70% simply cannot
live.
But this working class of artisans was kept outside the pale of
society – ritually 'untouchable' (even though their women were liable
to be 'touched' by the glad-eyed amongst 'upper' caste men). Whenever
these Scheduled Castes happened to defy oppression, the Brokers of
both God and War kept them in place by a complicated set of nonviolent
rituals (designed by Brahmins) or by elemental violence (executed by
lathaits).
Imagine, hence, a society where these community positions are kept
humanly inflexible, though presented as ordained by God – viz. the
holy Manusmriti. (Isn't it noteworthy that all social exploitation
claims a holy sanction?)
And then comes the twist of the 20th century. After centuries of
social placidity, we are suddenly exposed to the modern inputs of
education, urbanization and democracy, and all in one heap. Education
teaches us why all human beings are, or at least should be, equal.
Urbanization wipes out untouchability. And democracy helps to
operationalize equality. This is where India stood in 1947. But equal
opportunity never comes by mere signature or even statement of intent
– it has to be institutionalized. That is why B.R. Ambedkar fought for
separate electorates (in voting) and separate posts (in jobs) for the
former untouchables. Gandhiji christened them Children of God
(Harijans, a term that the modern-day dalit detests), but failed to
realize that they needed the human institution of constitutional
protectionism.
So, both sociologically and constitutionally, our Scheduled Caste
communities have historically been kept separate to aid oppression,
and now for protection.
Politically, as long as the Indian National Congress professed (and
indeed also managed) to represent all castes and communities, the SCs
(via iconic leaders like Babu Jagjivan Ram) were with the Congress in
regions where the left had no presence (which was most of India). But
by the mid-sixties, the Congress umbrella had begun to leak,
ultimately copiously – with each exit of a vote bank punching in a
hole beyond repair.
Land reforms inaugurated in 1956 did weaken the feudal classes that
had opposed the freedom struggle and, after 1950, found shelter in the
retrogressive but powerful Swatantra Party. But implementation of land
reform rules did not empower the land-tilling poor peasantry (largely
SCs and STs); it only benefited the plough-holding middle peasantry,
the feared 'other backward castes', once disparaged as kulaks (who as
lathaits violently opposed the SCs at the paid behest of the
feudalistic landlords). This new economic arrangement mobilized the
OBCs and gave them increasing political power, as also respectability
by rechristening them as 'secular' (since their ritualistic
antagonists, Brahmins and Thakurs, were largely with the 'sectarian'
Jana Sangh/BJP). Led by an iconic DMK in Tamil Nadu, the TDP's Kammas
in Andhra Pradesh, by Chaudhary Charan Singh in North India, their
political rise signalled the exit of OBCs from the Congress fold.
Meanwhile, the Punjabi Suba agitation in Punjab succeeded by the
mid-sixties in dividing the Sikhs between Congress and the Akali
Party.
Family planning excesses in North India during the Emergency years of
1975-77 further crystallized the exit of the Muslim vote bank from the
Congress in the Hindi belt, best symbolized by the stranglehold of the
Shahi Imam on this vote bank, and his repetitive, but negotiated (or
haggled?) periodic jumps across various political formations.
The sequential exit of each of these vote banks from the Congress not
only left gaping, leaking holes in the Congress umbrella, the process
also fuelled their subterranean movement (by piecemeal negotiation)
across various political formations. The brokers of these vote banks
negotiated different quid pro quo with the 'secular' Congress, the
'sectarian' BJP, and the 'progressive' leftists – all in an open and
transparent pursuit of electoral power.
The point to note is that barring the leftists and their touching
faith in progressive politics to transcend community identity, all
other political formations have in practice persisted with, if not
relied on, communitarian politics. The Congress may have tried to
represent all communities and the BJP all Hindu castes, but in
electoral practice their choice of candidates has invariably been
governed by community considerations, not ideology.
This is no different from the age-old practice of buying up the
village elder or the community leader to influence an entire village
or community during election time. In this arrangement the leader
usually assumes a 'victim status' – that is, 'buy me, please me,
pander to my whims, enrich my (extended) family – because I am the
symbol of historic oppression, I have the right to enrich myself in
the name of my caste/community/region.'
Imagine, herein, the Indian political scenario after Independence. The
Congress, as the harbinger of our freedom struggle, swept the general
elections of 1952, 1957 and 1962 – being the umbrella that sheltered
all castes and communities. But the rise of the Akalis in Punjab, the
OBCs all over the country, and the exit of the North Indian Muslim
vote bank, coupled with tribal alienation (and the rise of Naxalites)
left the Congress umbrella so badly leaking that it soon began to
embrace the same Raja elements it had earlier opposed during the
freedom struggle and taunted during the post-1947 integration of
'princely' states.
Barring the leftists, all other political parties too have always
adopted castes/communities as vote banks to seek political power. And
the three modern inputs of education, urbanization and democracy have
helped open the eyes of our hitherto submissive working class – the SC
communities – to grasp the political tenet that self-inclusive
integration is the first essential step towards political power.
The rise of an assertive Dalit politics needs to be read in this
context. From the integrationist stance of Babu Jagjivan Ram and the
Congress, to the aggressive but self-contained behaviour of Kanshi Ram
and the BSP – both in fact creations of B.R. Ambedkar's constitutional
reservations, the Dalits have been organized politically to match
their constitutionally ordained 'separate' status.
The Dalit rise has coincided with the progressive dismantling of the
all-pervasive Congress breaking into various caste/community based
political parties. Significantly, this has also been accompanied by
rising corruption in politics, bureaucracy and judiciary.
In this churning of the Indian political scenario, the Congress
umbrella seems to have been torn beyond repair (25 years have passed,
but the great 'national' party has not been anywhere near a majority
in the Lok Sabha); the OBCs are moving back and forth across the
political landscape; many disparate forces are forever trying to
convert the Muslims into a packaged vote bank; and institutional
values of propriety are getting eroded everywhere.
Such a decline in public practices has undeniably been affected by the
politics of 'upper caste' power. In the melee, the BSP, with its firm
grip on the huge SC vote bank, and open exhortation to its supporters
to adopt such 'upper caste' malpractices to grab electoral power, has
seen a steady rise. With its solid vote bank, it has the ability to
play a spoiler given its three to nine per cent share of votes polled
in multiparty contests. Unsurprisingly it is wooed by all.
In the UP elections of 2007, the BSP to everyone's surprise openly
tied up with the Brahmins. Having already won the support of poor
Muslims, it became the first party in two decades to obtain a full
majority in the UP Vidhan Sabha. This is the age-old Congress winning
formula of the 1952, 1957 and 1962 elections. To the consternation of
all, the BSP now boasts that this combination will also take it to
victory in the Lok Sabha.
The question is, will such a consequent dilution of its aggressive SC
posture (by joining hands with Brahmins) but without any remedial
ideology to help the poor, diminish the appeal of the BSP? Starkly
put, can such ideology-less politics ever prove lasting for a party
that claims to be egalitarian?
Again, do such electoral consolidations (the ultimate raison d'etre of
a political party to win democratic power) have a bearing on both
governance and its own core character?
The BSP rose on such chilling slogans as Tilak taraaju aur talwar,
inko maaro joote char, audacious in content and yet tactically helpful
in enabling the SC communities to substantially discard their fear of
the 'upper castes' such that they can now think of raining blows on
their historical oppressors. Again, 'Vote hamara, raj tumhara, nahin
chalega, nahin chalega' opened their eyes to the unfairness of their
votes serving to help consolidate the power of their historical
oppressors. The party's politics was best summed up by the pithy
slogan 'Vote se lenge PM/CM, arakshan se lenge SP/DM' – the ultimate
contribution of Baba Saheb B.R. Ambedkar.
But by 2002, it was clear that while exclusivist SC politics makes BSP
a major player, it would not give it majority power. Hence by 2007,
they openly cobbled up a multi-caste coalition – 'Jiski jitni sankhya
bhaari, uski utni bhagidaari', i.e., the share in power should be in
direct proportion to vote bank strength.
In essence, the BSP is doing nothing different from what the Congress
has tried to do all through – represent most if not all. So, while a
dilution of its aggressive SC sloganeering gives it the appearance of
increased appeal across the board, an analysis of its last two years
of governance suggests that it has not dropped any of its SC
programmes.
Hence, to compare it with the Congress, the BSP will be as egalitarian
or corrupt as that party has been, even though different in style. If
the 'social movement' aspect of the BSP is increasingly degenerating
into power-hungry politics, it is only mimicking the 'national
movement' of the Congress which degenerated into 'India is Indira' and
pioneered the trend of dynastic succession which has since infected
all political formations except the Left and the BJP.
On the other hand, Congress enjoyed the advantage of a sober national
consensus as its basis. The BSP, in contrast, began on an aggressive
anti-caste mode. The 'Thakur, Brahmin, Bania chor, baki sab hain DS4',
(The three upper castes are robbers; the rest are with us) soon
progressed to the audacious 'Tilak, taraazu aur talwar, inko maaro
joote char' (Shower kicks on the three upper castes).
But post-2007, the BSP has made up with the upper castes to herald a
'bhaichara' (fellow feeling) way to grab power, of course, decorated
with criminal chieftains from all castes and communities to make the
electoral contests more manageable.
Will this tendency destroy the egalitarian beginnings of the BSP?
Moreover, will it then take even less time than the Congress to begin
unravelling?
------------------------------------
----
INFORMATION OVERLOAD?
Get all ZESTCaste mails sent out in a span of 24 hours in a single mail. Subscribe to the daily digest version by sending a blank mail to ZESTMedia-digest@yahoogroups.com, OR, if you have a Yahoo! Id, change your settings at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/join/
PARTICIPATE:-
On this list you can share caste news, discuss caste issues and network with like-minded anti-caste people from across India and the world. Just write to zestcaste@yahoogroups.com
TELL FRIENDS TO SIGN UP:-
If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTCaste by sending a blank mail to ZESTCaste-subscribe@yahoogroups.com OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/join/
Also have a look at our sister list, ZESTMedia: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
ZESTCaste-digest@yahoogroups.com
ZESTCaste-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ZESTCaste-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment