caste is passe

you bloom where you're planted.

the god of all angsts, blooming in print and in person across global cities, says: 'Poverty too, like feminism, is often framed as an identity problem.' she should write another 5,000 or 30,000 word essay castigating this short film maker for wrongly framing the problem of poverty.. the maid's not poor because her mother is a maid and her mother was also a maid and her mother was also a maid and her mother..

poverty is what happens to the maid when her livelihood is destroyed because of the neo-liberal excesses of the state directed by the dark forces, the foundations. poverty is what happens when she's displaced and is forced to move to another neighbourhood and work as a maid. now she's blooming where she was planted. right, god?

keys to the world

Ourtelangana.com exists for the sole purpose of facilitating a Telangana state .Though we encourage all users including those who have questions about "why we need Telangana”, we absolutely will not tolerate any demeaning statements about our culture, our leaders, our students, our people nor our demand for a seperate state.

By "clicking" on "Jai Telanagna" below you can enter the site else you are not welcome!

have you ever come across such a website? they open a window to the world, through the internet, just to tell it that it's not welcome. elsewhere on the site, they say:

3. Globalization: We don't want to miss the fruits of the globalization. Even though Hyderabad city has many IT and Pharma , most of our young people don't have adequate education to take up the jobs. Our education system has been discriminated for the last 5 decades and we can only improve our children lives with our own rule.

they don't want to miss the fruits of globalization, but would rather meet the world through closed doors. a question: do you think they've decided whether they want the shamshabad international airport or not? or would visitors be waved through only if they say 'jai telangana'?

kalpana kannabiran says:

The history of the Telangana region is a history of political radicalism and resistance to forces of conservatism across the board – ranging from fundamentalism and feudalism to authoritarian “democracy” to dogmatic and patriarchal communism. It is this history of Telangana that will set the new state apart. At a time when global capitalism has eaten into our economies and our lives, Telangana having paid a particularly heavy price, we need to draw on our history of political radicalism and set out the non- negotiables – resistance to virulent capitalism and discrimination being an important part of state policy.

that seems a clear 'no' to globalisation. like all globalized protectors/activists of the grassroots, ms.kannabiran would like to see that the grassroots stay rooted. another class of globalized telanganis, also very protective of the vulnerable grassroots stupid enough to stay rooted, say:

Q: Globalization & Telangana.
A: It is a mistake to construe Telangana question as a part of Anti-Globalisation movement and sentiment. In fact many people who are supporting Telangana statehood are supporters of Globalisation of economy. Both the positions are not contradictory. Telangana movement is against colonization not Globalisation. There is a big difference between them.

In fact many people who are supporting Telangana statehood are supporters of Globalisation of economy. are they? are many people sure about what they want from telangana, forget whether they want globalisation or not?

is kura rajanna, of the cpi (ml), janashakti group, a staunch supporter of telangana also a supporter of globalisation?

Will you put a halt to (LPG) -- liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation in separate Telangana? Are you going to impose your own version of Vision-2020? Will the State violence continue in case you succeed? Will all the landless get land in such a separate State? Will it have Sixth Schedule so that tribal autonomous councils could be formed?

do the politicians agree with rajanna?

Mr. Rao assured them that the people of Telangana would not like to lose the industry when their State was formed. They would roll out a red carpet welcome to the industry in the separate State. He recalled that Hyderabad had a rich history of accommodating all sections of people.

but there are other politicians, some from kcr's own family, who want to impose visa-like restrictions on people who want to work in hyderabad. a learned person i had met a couple of days said, something like: isn't the telangana movement a response to globalization? i feel it is too many responses to globalisation, and no coherent answers.

and among the responses, you can see undercurrents of thackerayism, ludditism, rentier capitalism, maoist adventurism, definite tendencies toward fascism, autarkic fundamentalism and lots of other not so rational ideas and ambitions.

again, do they know what they want? the world thinks it can do business with hyderabad, and that means trade in not just goods and services but also ideas, cultures, and people. all the people referred to earlier in this post have benefitted, personally, from such global flows. there is no unanimity among them on the question of globalization, but they all want keys to the gates to the world.

gail omvedt

for no particular reason, excerpts from some essays by gail omvedt that i had always liked:

However, one of the most important sociologists on caste, Louis Dumont, comes out of the Durkheimian school with its emphasis on the role of religion and values as binding and defining forces in society. Dumont's major work, Homo Hierarchus, takes caste in India as a unique system, intimately connected with Hinduism. He views it as the supreme example in the world of the recognition of hierarchy as a fact of social life, and in its shifting levels and logics of purity/pollution, encompassing/encompassed, the extreme purity of the Brahmans at the top requires as its antithesis the extreme pollution of the Untouchable at the bottom. In insisting on this core role of Hinduism in defining caste, Dumont in fact has much in common with Ambedkar.

It also has to be noted that in spite of his insistence on the uniqueness of caste in India, in spite of his refutations of those sociologists who attempted to analyse ``caste'' and ``race'' as inherently similar stratification systems, Durkheim does have much to say on their comparability, and as a sociologist he accepts comparison as a crucial goal. ``Racism represents a contradictory resurgence in egalitarian society of what finds direct expression as hierarchy in caste society,'' he writes (Homo Hierarchus, p. 214). In other words, caste is justified by the inherent values of Indian society; racial discrimination, in contrast, is against modern values of equality of all human beings and so is justified by assuming the oppressed are not quite human. It is an important insight, shared by almost all sociologists. Even anthropologists such as Gerald Berreman, who analyse caste and racial systems as similar, mention this point of legitimation as a distinguishing feature.

from Caste, race and sociologists- 1.

However, Indians may well ask: what is after all the relevance of these studies of caste in pre-British or ``traditional'' India? Hasn't it changed significantly today? Weber, Marx, Dumont also, of course, believed that caste was changing, with Marx taking the strongest position that it would crumble under the impact of industrialisation. Dumont, however, also emphasised change and even gave a theorisation of it: in modern India, caste was becoming ``substantialised'', that is, caste groups were organising as large blocs - for instance, all the Yadavas in a given State, or an even wider territory - mobilising to confront other large caste blocs. Dumont argued that such a transformation of caste into ethnic- like groups represented a fundamental shift from hierarchy, a change in the system itself.

But how fundamental is it? The idea of the innumerable jatis in hierarchies being transformed into ethnic-like blocs seems to fit much experience (the caste-based ``voting blocs'' of politics), but are these really competing on a non-hierarchical basis? Have these larger caste blocs (Yadavas as a group, Brahmans as a group, Pariahs as a group, etc.) really changed their places in a hierarchy, or moved into a position sufficient to say that a hierarchy no longer exists? Or is there still a broad correlation between economic position and caste status? Is inter-marriage occurring at a significant enough rate to really transform the system? Have the equalitarian policies of the Indian state - as Srinivas and Beteille argued over 30 years ago for the prestigious journal Scientific American - joined with the forces of industrialisation wrought a fundamental change in caste traditions? Or are Dalits right in claiming that their oppression and exploitation is as bitter as ever?

from Caste, race and sociologists- 2.

The purpose here is certainly not to celebrate capitalism, and the new forms of wage slavery replacing the old. But nor is it to demonise them or suggest that the process can or should be avoided. It is to recognise what was new and transformative in capitalist relations of production. Marx's view of capitalism was not so simple as that propagated by some of his followers in India. He never saw it as an unmitigated evil, to be resisted at all costs. Indeed, if it came to a choice between capitalism and feudalism, or between advanced and backward capitalism, there is no question where he stood. Marx was a proponent not of maintaining old forms of production, whether idealised feudal villages or ``subsistence'' production; he was unalterably an Enlightenment proponent of that much-scorned word, ``progress'' - or what we today call ``development''. He saw it with open eyes, as costly, often destructive, but he hailed the creativeness in this destruction.

Behind this lay his view of the human being as a creature of tremendous potential development, a creator of productive forces and intellectual achievements. History itself, with all its tumult, unevenness, exploitation and even misery, was basically a process of increasing these capacities. The famous ``growth of the productive forces'' which to him lay at the basis of change, was in fact the growth of the forces of human beings itself; technology represented human capacities. Capitalism was the final stage of class society and laid the basis for socialism in two ways - first by creating the productive forces, the technology that could produce a truly wealthy existence, and second by creating the human beings, the ``proletariat'', who could manage this technology. The very term ``destructive'' in Marx often carries a revolutionary connotation, destructive of the confining, narrow, stagnation of backwardness. Capitalism was thus a necessary stage through which humanity must pass, to be undertaken as rapidly as possible and with as little cost as possible.

from Marx and globalisation.

In reality, the choice between mindless developmentalism and eco- romanticism is a false one. The alternatives are meaningless by themselves. The government-promoted irrigation projects are highly centralised not only in production but also in distribution: they tend to concentrate the water provided in privileged areas that would become green islands of development in an ongoing sea of drought. The rainwater harvesting schemes, on the other hand, in spite of their value, are insufficient by themselves in areas of really low rainfall - and there is also the danger that effective water-harvesting in areas of higher elevation can cut off water to rivers which might otherwise carry it to lower areas. Both extremes take apparently opposite attitudes towards the state, yet there is a commonality - one would simply let the state go on building irrigation projects as its experts have decided, and the other would have the state do nothing at all and give all responsibility to the localities. Neither involves a project of people joining together from diverse backgrounds and over a wide area to try to influence state policy, formulating and struggling for an alternative plan.

Such an effort, though, is being made in the Krishna basin districts of southern Maharashtra. Here, using experience from such struggles as that for the Bali Raja dam and the Takari scheme, and building as well on movements of dam evictees, a new alternative which seeks to provide a ``walk on two legs'' solution to drought is coming up.

from Drought-proofing.

Ravidas had written:

"The regal realm with the sorrowless name
they call it Queen City, a place with no pain,
no taxes or cares, none owns property there,
no wrongdoing, worry, terror, or torture.
Oh my brother, I've come to take it as my own,
my distant home, where everything is right.
They do this or that, they walk where they wish,
they stroll through fabled palaces unchallenged.
Oh, says Ravidas, a tanner now set free,
those who walk beside me are my friends."

This expressed both "class" and "caste" utopias — no taxes or property, and the right of even the lowest toilers to walk freely everywhere, so important for those classified as Untouchables and relegated to live and work away from the main areas of a city. Within the context of a Brahman-dominated medieval order, this was a dream. The coming of a new industrial society and the rise of science and technology should have made possible a life of prosperity for allsuch bold dreams could have shaped a new national society in India. But this did not happen. Industrialism, science and rationality came to India as an appendage to colonial rule. By the end of the 19th century, the early openness of the British became closed, and racist ideologies began to pervade their rule.

The discovery of a relationship between Sanskrit and European languages led to the formation of the "Aryan theory" — which expressed on the one hand a racial kinship between Europeans and high-caste Indians, and on the other hand defined the Shudras, Dalits and Adivasis as descendents of more primitive, dark-skinned indigenous peoples. The Indian elite accepted this racist interpretation readily enough: they were Aryans, the noble ones, possessors of ancient religious scriptures and high philosophical knowledge. Theirs was a spiritual heritage; the low castes could be seen as subordinate parts of this, incorporated within a hierarchy of "Hinduism" which possessed a unique social system that could incorporate inferior elements without destroying them. Varnashrama dharma was thus given a new justification. All the elite "reform" organisations of the 19th century — the Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj, Prarthana Samaj — proclaimed this acceptance of Vedic-Brahman hegemony within Hinduism in their very names.

from What went wrong?

civil society and political society

a very interesting paper(pdf), by partha chatterjee- a key formulation in the paper 'is a split in the field of the political between a domain of properly constituted civil society and a more ill-defined and contingently activated domain of political society'. an excerpt:

Let me summarise my main argument. With the continuing rapid growth of the Indian economy, the hegemonic hold of corporate capital over the domain of civil society is likely to continue. This will inevitably mean continued primitive accumulation. That is to say, there will be more and more primary producers, i e, peasants, artisans and petty manufacturers, who will lose their means of production. But most of these victims of primitive accumulation are unlikely to be absorbed in the new growth sectors of the economy. They will be marginalised and rendered useless as far as the sectors dominated by corporate capital are concerned. But the passive revolution under conditions of electoral democracy makes it unacceptable and illegitimate for the government to leave these marginalised populations without the means of labour to simply fend for themselves. That carries the risk of turning them into the “dangerous classes”. Hence, a whole series of governmental policies are being, and will be, devised to reverse the effects of primitive accumulation. This is the field in which peasant societies are having to redefine their relations with both the state and with capital. Thus far, it appears that whereas many new practices have been developed by peasants, using the mechanisms of democratic politics, to claim and negotiate benefits from the state, their ability to deal with the world of capital is still unsure and inadequate. This is where the further development of peasant activities as non-corporate capital, seeking to ensure the livelihood needs of peasants while operating within the circuits of capital, will define the future of peasant society in India. As far as I can see, peasant society will certainly survive in India in the 21st century, but only by accommodating a substantial non-agricultural component within the village. Further, I think there will be major overlaps and continuities in emerging cultural practices between rural villages and small towns and urban areas, with the urban elements gaining predominance.

should read it again. [thanks, rama].

from sircilla to wherever mr.guha's next article is going to be published

a slogan in telugu, scrawled over a wall bordering the security printing press in hyderabad says:

workers of the world unite! oppose globalization, privatization!

workers who produce a quintessentially national product calling for a global effort to oppose globalization? now here's a quintessentially global product ( schooled in la martiniere school, calcutta, st. stephen's college, delhi and the delhi school of economics- each institution started, run or inspired by global institutions/ideas) telling you:

..the views and analyses of the political economist, philosopher and sociologist Karl Heinrich Marx remain as relevant as ever in understanding why the world is what it is at present.

now if rapelli mallaiah had gone to la martiniere school and st.stephens college and the delhi school of economics he'd have realized much before that fateful day that karl marx is as relevant as ever. i'd say, globalize mallaiah's and paranjoy guha thakurta's world.

caste will not wither away, aspirations will..and souls too

The view, that once markets are properly freed from government intervention, racist practices and caste-based rewards will wilt under competitive pressure and ultimately wither away, is plain wrong. In the case of caste practices we know that these rose to prominence in India when there was very little government and, the logic of this note shows that they can flourish very well in the absence of government. Indeed once we try to understand markets, cutting ourselves free from the chord- call it umbilical if you wish- of methodological individualism, this is not difficult to see at all.

from this paper, Participatory Equity and Economic Development: Policy Implications for a Globalized World, by Kaushik Basu. referring to a study on the garment industry in tirupur (so often cited by several analysts to make the point that caste plays a positive role in our economy), he tells us:

....the Gounders- an elite cultivator caste that has had a history of being prominent in business and finance- controls a disproportionate amount of capital. The Gounders are a close-knit community and when they go into business they do so with a greater abundance of capital than do the non-Gounders, who comprise 42% of the exporters of Tirupur in the sample that Banerjee and Munshi study.

What these authors manage to demonstrate is that capital in the hands of non-Gounders is as productive or even slightly more productive than in the hands of the Gounders. Output is smaller in a new non-Gounder firm compared with a Gounder firm but the former typically cross over the Gounder firm in five years time.

Why then are the Gounder firms flush with capital? Banerjee and Munshi conclude, rightly, that this suggests the presence of 'community effects'. Clearly community identity matters per se.

if it weren't for caste, an equally qualified dalit given equal access to capital would probably be more successful than a reddy in the bulk drugs industry in hyderabad, a rajaka moviemaker would make more successful films than a kamma, a pardhi would be more successful than a gujarati/marwari bania as a stockbroker in dalal street, a pasi would be a better prime minister than a brahmin or a khatri or a rajput.

thanks to caste, it'll be very, very long...too long before you witness any of those events and not flinch or gasp.. meanwhile, do read and enjoy this piece of wisdom from a commenter on my last post:

look at the quality of non-uppercaste elected members in the parliament and legislative assemblies - so many of them are rapists, murderers, bandits, fraudsters.

Are these role models for the so-called underprivileged, or is it that these are the best they can throw up from their midst?