A discussion is being started with this post on 'Strategies to transcend caste in order to create and strengthen new bonds within Lokavidyadhar Samaj".
Caste- a Lokavidya perspective
Jati(Caste)
refers to the social identity of members of Lokavidyadhar Samaj. It
defines the role and obligations of a member of the Samaj. It denotes
the active knowledge-base possessed by the members of the jati
on which their livelihoods are based ,which in turn determines their
role and obligations in the productive life of society. Each jati,
therefore had a fairly clearly defined position in the productive,
distributive and service processes of society and there is no
evidence to believe that this participative status was ever denied to
any jati. In almost
all important social functions- births,marriages,harvests and deaths,
each section had a role to play and we see that, to this day, every
'traditional' function has roles for different jatis
to play.The dalits, tribals and 'untouchables' also had clearly
defined roles and concomitant obligations, however, at some point(s)
in time they were excluded from mainstream society and lived a
largely marginalised life fraught with great exploitation and misery.
This social identity, which is self-perpetrating (through birth), is
very strong and has formed the basis for social organisation,
especially in the colonial and post-colonial era. Caste hierarchy,
the origins of which are not clearly understood; especially the
origin and continuation of untouchability, has been around for a very
long time. Various dubious theories to sanctify this heirarchy have
been put forth. In practice, however, it appears that in the
pre-British era, caste discrimination never became a factor for
social disruption, though the abominable practice of untouchability
kept out sizable sections of people from ordinary social life all
over the country. The neo-hierarchical classification of castes into
'forward' and 'backward' categories is a colonial phenomenon and goes
hand-in-hand with the debunking of Lokavidya.
The 'scramble' for 'employment' in the colonial and post-colonial
era, at the cost of delegitimising Lokavidya and all livelihoods
based thereon, has led to a fierce struggle for the 'backwardness'
tag in order to become eligible for the
reservations/concessions/feebies etc given by centre/state/public
instituions-some of which are even Constitutionally mandated. This
has led to a perverse 'strengthening' of caste-identity and
caste-hierarchy. The British used this nascent social discordance to
politically divide the people and the current political dispensation
also actively encourages this discordance. Our understanding is that,
this encouragement of discordance is aimed at completely
delegitimising Lokavidya(even in their own eyes) and reducing
Lokavidyadhar Samaj to a slave society. Lokavidyadhar Samaj has to
transcend caste-hierarchy and recapture the imagination that can lead
to the establishment of a truly egalitarian society where knowledge
is in command and equal respect for practitioners of all aspects of
knowledge/skills is the norm.
A general
survey of the political liberation movements of last century will
show that their primary aim ( and to whatever extent, also
achievement) was economic equality. This resulted in a certain adhoc
perception popularised by the system that economic status will act
as the uniformisation agent for social equality. That is,
sections of the Samaj economically well off by dint of the strength
of the connection with the exploitative system – a rich farmer
setting up auctioning/processing produce, a blacksmith or a sthapati
setting up a “production” unit, a woman employing women in a
“manufacturing” unit, a labourer becoming a “contractor” or
aworker in a private/public/ multinational industry, a young educated
in a government job, ... - accepted the same values as the dominant
ruling /political /economic class. This also gave rise to the most
retrogressive welfare measure of money distribution, household goods
or food. These measures kept the social inequalities intact and
indeed worsened with the added accelerated movements for reservation
systems at every level of organization in every department of life.
This state of affairs seems to be a result of absolute no-confidence
in the dialectics of processes and directions of change. In turn,
this meant the loss of certain cardinal principles from the public
view, principles which alone demand, every moment of life, the
“truth” that is sought through the dialectic. These measures got
the direct and indirect approvals from economists and social
scientists, domestic and foreign , and also the world finacncial
market system facilitating globalization and growth of domestic
capitalist class. It became increasingly clear that the radical
change and political imagination which we conceive of can not
possibly take place via the economic uniformization route , but
rather the social uniformization route. That is, while the economic
uniformization necessarily led to debate and discourse on the
development models and planning, leading to adhoc monetary measures,
often on the edge of hopelessness, because of the globalization
overheads and the intrinsic charactristics of the new technologies.
It appears
that political mobilization based on certain active principles of
social uniformization as opposed to economic uniformization measure
may be the effective route to unleash a process for achieving social
justice for the Samaj. In the context of our knowledge of the history
of the Samaj, the following three principles ( and others) seem to
have that capacity. They are not demands to the existing ruling
power, but by the Samaj on itself. They are formulated in this
fashion in the context of the way the ruling system exercises control
by framing “laws” and the “code for administration” of the
laws which the samaj is subject to. The options mentioned below are
deemed to enable the society to counteract in a, possibly long and
ardous , process of dialogue with those processes that seem to have
acquired a certain quality of “untruth” from lack of reflection
and plain ignorance.
The
practice of assigning Jati or Caste of the child at birth ( via
certificate) be abolished.
Instead only
the Jati or Caste of the parents ( individually or together) will be
recorded. Also the name will be recorded not as Son of Father, butas
Born to the Mother , whose name as entered in the hospital/panchayat
, is say, Kalyani Krishnan; and Father's name comes through the
name of mother the way she registers it. Such a child will be given
compulsory education of whatever type by the community until at the
age of 12/14 ( to be related to the best age of termination of
coeducation and or educational content regarding public life, family
life etc.) and will be having the same status as a sant, as being
caste neutral ( in the classical Indian thought, as pure
embodiment of the spirit). At the end of this period, the child
will be eligible to choose any caste of his choice for the
purpose of earning a livelihood and/or acquiring the status accorded
in society and be deemed eligible for any prevailing reservation on
the basis of the economic condition of his parents or any such
criteria of the state. However, such
a choice and/or enjoyment of conferred privilages is not mandatory.
The children of the samaj will have the
second choice of choosing a caste/jati for the express and
very important purpose of entering into union in marriage ( whatever
type) for availing of possible subsidies, choices for getting
employment, settling in the natural geographical location of the
spouse available with centre/state/public institutions etc. to setup
family life and also be deemed eligible for grants for medical
services and child care and early education ( see para above).
However, such a
choice and/or enjoyment of conferred privilages is not mandatory.
The adult members of the samaj,
considering the rather terrible difficulties they face in the
twilight of their life without any assistance, will have the third
and final choice to choose jati/caste for the purpose of being
deemed eligible of availing concessions on retirement ( interpreted
appropriately) for being eligible for medical/survival/group
benefits available or by their autonomous faith based on their life
and experience thus far, so that justice is served. However, such
a choice and/or enjoyment of conferred privilages is not
mandatory.
2. The
practice of identifying women as a separate jati/community/problem
within the general political/development discourse- be
abolished.
The First item having
been formulated for any child, women are automatically part of the
samaj as understood there. Compulsory education until age 12/14 with
no gender discrimination will be subject to some extra criteria
arising out of early onset of puberty in females. And any girl child
at the age of 14 or a mature girl while getting married or a woman at
any time of her life may exercise the option of choosing a
jati/caste for the purpose of utilizing the subsidies or other
grants available under ay special category currently existing,
including choosing her groom. She may also register for any special
categories under which survival , nutrition and medical help is
freely available under the present ruling order. And just as the
child is caste neutral, being adopted either by the king or by
the mendicant etc., so also the woman is caste neutral by dint
of being inherently capable of bearing the of child of any male (
following the dharma of any caste etc.) . Thus we add woman to child
and sant as being caste neutral. And route to social justice runs
through the estate of these three categories.
3. The
Natural Inheritance of private property and Natural Transfer of
public property into private hands be abolished.
In the
above, the second adjective “Natural” connotes the same sense as
the first. The above is not a fundamentally new principle, but
requires serious formulation after deep reflection in the context of
the “truth” realized by the samaj that all things in the world
are “public”and are deemed “private” by the society in some
context, for some purpose, either forgotten or too obvious. And just
as the individual “does not know” who/what he/she is and exists
on the strength of the “knowledge of identity” given by the
family/society , similarly any kind of wealth ( material/otherwise)
is not born with the self-declaratory identity, that is, wealth is
born owner-neutral just as in the above we considered the child
is born caste-neutral and the woman and sant are caste neutral.
We have demanded the 'Right to livelihood based on Lokavidya' that,
in practice, translates to a demand for an equal minimum wage for ALL
occupations/livelihoods based on Lokavidya and/or modern knowledge.
Can Lokavidyadhar Samaj move toward a demand for a Right to an
Equality-based Identity? The suggestions made could be seen as the
active aspect of such a demand.
These
principles if reflected upon and adopted ( in appropriate form) with
the right spirit , will unleash hitherto unimagined churning in the
social fabric of the Samaj, infusing strength into it with
unimaginable revolutionary consequences. It may enable the Samaj to
launch a One-point Satyagraha or Constitutional demand, by combining
the above neutality into a hitherto impossible limit of meaning for
human life. Such satyaghahis may constitute the new core for creating
the mass base for social justice in our country.
B.
Krishnarajulu & K.K.Surendran
January 2014
