Dalit emancipation: A nationalist view
by Punarvasu Parekh on 19 Jan 2016 6 Comments

That some Dalits should set up their own trades and industries, become millionaires, offer jobs instead of seeking job reservations and establish their own chamber of commerce and industry is a novel and wholly welcome phenomenon. Under inspiration from Dalit thinker and anthropologist Chandra Bhan Prasad, Milind Kamble in 2005 set up the Dalit Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, heralding a new era of Dalit businessmen. Today it boasts of nearly 4000 members who are engaged in chemicals, plastics, solar energy, agro industries and construction. The chamber, which has 17 branches in the country and 7 branches abroad, provides them a platform for mutual cooperation.

 

Their philosophy is one of fierce self-reliance and strong individual effort. Stop whining about social injustice; stop making demands on government; subsidies, freebies and reservations have only converted Dalits into a vote bank without solving their problems. Instead of relying on state largesse, Dalits should avail of the opportunities offered by a liberal, fairly open economic system irrespective of castes and communities, chart their own course in upward social mobility, prove their mettle in open competition with other members of society and wipe out the blot of backwardness with their actions and achievements.

 

In the words of Chandra Bhan Prasad, Dalits should defeat Manu with the help of Adam Smith. The author of the Wealth of Nations (1776) is regarded as the father of modern economics, whereas the ancient law-giver Manu, author of Manusmruti, is widely regarded as the epitome of standard social philosophy of Hinduism. A new generation of Dalit intellectuals has been saying that it is possible to overcome the old and oppressive social system with the help of a modern economic system. Capitalism, which smashed feudalism in Europe, is now smashing casteism in India. Market rather than state is the best antidote to social inequalities.

 
This thinking is in line with Dr. Ambedkar’s insight. Ambedkar had a socialist streak, but has also written about the stifling influence of government controls and the need for private enterprise. He realized that in the absence of land ownership, Dalits would find it hard to come up in an agro-based rural economy. Their best bet lay in industrialization. Urbanisation that follows rapid industrialization has the power to obliterate or at least submerge caste differences. Have you ever seen untouchability in a crowded local train compartment? Of the thousands of people who eat in hotels, restaurants and on roadside stalls in cities, how many bother to ascertain the caste of the cook or waiter?      

 

Recently, Dicci celebrated its tenth foundation day which was inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Addressing over a thousand Dalit entrepreneurs, Modi said Dr. Ambedkar rightly understood that Dalit empowerment required them to break the stranglehold of traditional occupations and set up their own businesses. Modi urged Dalits to reach for the sky, stand tall and become job-givers instead of job seekers. 


These are inspiring words, but Dalit entrepreneurs face a long and thorny path. One of their main problems is lack of access to existing business networks. Weak contract enforcement in India means that many entrepreneurs depend on seed capital made available on trust by members of their extended family or community. They also depend on trust-based community networks for appropriate trustworthy personnel and business contacts. This explains numerous instances of specific businesses being dominated by members of one particular community. Dalit entrepreneurs lack such networks in their own community and find it almost impossible to break into the ones dominated by other communities.

 

Part of the answer lies in voluntary action by large companies that have expansive supply chains. The Tata group has been at the forefront of such experiments. Large government departments have also tried to bring Dalit entrepreneurs into their networks. How such initiatives can be expanded without compromising commercial principles remains to be seen.

 

At the Dicci meet, Modi made a very significant point: breaking the bondage of social prejudice is much harder than overcoming economic backwardness. Even Dr. Ambedkar, despite his education, erudition and high achievements, could not escape caste-based discrimination.

 

The problem is compounded by the tendency among “forward dalits” to distance themselves from their community. Many Dalits have come up in life through government jobs or with their own efforts. However, as soon as they rise a little in economic terms, they start considering themselves superior to other Dalits. Instead of assisting their brothers in rising above their lot, they start taking pride in keeping way from them. As a result, the larger Dalit society remains stagnant and vulnerable to prejudices, humiliation and exploitation by other castes.       

 

This is an old tendency. Academic Surinder Jodhka points out that through history a few Dalits had repeatedly made it to the top. When the writ of the Peshwas weakened, many Maratha satraps, hailing from backward or Dalit castes, became independent rulers of their fiefdoms. Even Maharaja Ranjit Singh, says Jodhka, came from a caste which would today be classified as Dalit.

 

Caste barriers, often wrongly projected as iron cages, did not prevent a few talented or valorous Dalits from establishing their own kingdoms. However, having become rulers, these Dalit kings underwent ceremonies that gave them the status of Kshatriyas or Rajputs. They consciously cut themselves off from their lowly origins. So, their success did nothing for the oppressed Dalit masses. In contrast, Dicci members proudly call themselves Dalits; but Dicci works for the successful and affluent Dalits, not for social justice.

 
How could we remove the social stigma, wholly unjustly attached to certain castes? Untouchability is a blot on Hindu society and has been condemned as such by every Hindu reformer. Yet the curse has persisted. It is not open to every Dalit to become a king or a millionaire. Moreover, if a Brahmin enjoys respectability despite being poor, why should we expect a Dalit to rise far above the rest to be treated as an equal?

 

Conversion from Hinduism has proved futile. Ambedkar led his followers out of Hinduism to become Buddhists, but they were soon labeled as neo-Buddhists by the press and political class to remind them of their pre-conversion identity. Some Dalits embraced Christianity, only to find that the discrimination persisted even in the new brotherhood. The Dalit identity, which they were rightly so keen to shed, followed them like a dark shadow wherever they went. 

 

That was probably because the approach is wrong. The anti-Dalit prejudice culminating in untouchability is a sin of Hindu society and the remedy too must come from within. Untouchability can be finished forever by awakening the right understanding among the Hindus. I have always felt that the Dalits’ faith in and commitment to Hinduism is much deeper and stronger than that of caste Hindus. “Say proudly ‘We are Hindus’” is a slogan given by Hindu organizations. 

 

It is easy to proudly call yourself a Hindu when people touch your feet as Maharaj, when they salute you as Thakursaab or fold hands to show you respect as Sethji. But when people throw stones at you on your way to the temple, when the priest rushes to hit you with a stick for entering the temple, it is hard to retain faith in Dharma. Yet Dalits have been doing it spontaneously, effortlessly, for centuries.

 

Braving centuries of unjust humiliation and exploitation, resisting force, threats and pressure from Muslim rulers and disregarding allurements and sleek but poisonous propaganda of Christian missionaries, they have stuck steadfastly to their ancestral faith. Their fidelity to Dharma, in the face of severe adversity, deserves a deep bow of praise and gratitude from the rest of Hindu society. When Hindus realize this, untouchability will disappear forever. Let us work for that day.

 

Such a realization is a demand not just of ethics and humanism, but also of prudence. Hinduism today is facing a mortal threat to its existence from Abrahamic religions in the country of its origin. They are keen to locate and exploit every fault line in the traditional social structure. It is high time caste Hindus closed ranks with their Dalit brethren.  

User Comments Post a Comment
After reading this article it becomes obvious that there is some thing seriously wrong with the Hindu philosophy of human classification.
What makes a human un touchable?
Who gives the right to the priest to hit a person whose only concern was to worship and pay respect, no wonder there are so many indigenous separatist movements going on in India for decades.
Time abolish caste system!
observer
January 19, 2016
Report Abuse
What kind of Nonsense it is.. Can we start OBC chamber of commerce, and will govt support it?

senthil
January 19, 2016
Report Abuse
The bharathiya social system is NOT oppressive.. it is a false propoganda that is being deliberately played to target the upper caste and push them in to guilt..

senthil
January 19, 2016
Report Abuse
Dharma does not require the caste system, period. Varna and caste are two different things. The latter is a socio-economic creation and indeed during the heyday of India's prosperity, the caste structures were (like the European medieval guilds) the basis of India's prosperity.

Varna on the other hand, has to do with the early organisation of society into different segments : learning, defence, commerce, agriculture. It was not meant to harden into an unchanging system.

But historically, the pride that craftsmen took in their work and who belonged to certain castes, that hardened into a generational adherence to that caste, also created the social problems that Hindu society faced.

Dr. Ambedakar has speculated on the origins of Untouchability (as it is called). He argued that Untouchables were fallen Sudras, who did not abide by certain rigid social rules.

Some economists/scholars have argued that today the Indian economy is dominated by small and medium entrepreneurs who belong to specific castes. And so the writer of this article is right in saying that the Dalits cannot easily find start up capital.

At any rate, regardless of the somewhat obtuse comment made by Bhanu about Adam Smith defeating Manu (!), it is high time that Hindu society reform itself, not only for political reasons, but for Dharmic reasons.
Dr. Vijaya Rajiva
January 20, 2016
Report Abuse
I agree largely with the above article, but with one comment. There has been widespread misunderstanding of the Manu Smriti, and Manu as the 'law giver'. First of all Manu is NOT the law giver. (as said by Sri Chandrasekhara Sarawathi of Kanchi Mutt himself).He is only one of the interpreters of the Shruthis.
To explain - Hindu scriptures are roughly of 3 types - the Shruthis (which are immutable laws or truths) the Smritis (the interpretations) and the Puranas. ('historical' accounts) Shruthis are the Vedas from which derive Upanishads etc. 'Smriti' derives from the term 'smarana' - 'to remember', 'to recall'. It is CONTEXTUAL. Just like there is our Constitution and our laws and they are contextually interpreted by the judges and applied. There are said to be 18 Smritis, including others' like Yagnavalkya, Parasara etc. Further there are supposed to be another 18 Upa Smritis of which the Bhagavad Gita is also supposed to be one, which also is the closest to the present day (age of Kali) context. Even regarding Manu, many are of the opinion that Manu is more of a prototype, and that there are several Manus.
Savithri
January 22, 2016
Report Abuse
@vijaya Rajiva,

/** Dharma does not require the caste system, period **/

You are outrightly wrong. Kula-Gothram-Kula acharam - jathi are the foundations of dharma.. These are the dharmic system in which dharma can prevail..

Urban uprooted wonders, who threw away all acharams of their kula, cannot understand or accept these basics..

/** Varna on the other hand, has to do with the early organisation of society into different segments : learning, defence, commerce, agriculture. It was not meant to harden into an unchanging system.
**/

Such statements are signs of corporate mentality, where urban uprooted people who survive ONLy through corporates (and none else) want their history to also be corporatised..

i have demolished this false theory simply by quoting all ithihasa figures.. Sri Rama, Sri Krishna, were kshatriyas ONLY based on his birth..

senthil
January 26, 2016
Report Abuse