Short answer: Its all the fault of Hindus. Long answer: Its all the fault of upper-caste (originals, converts). Unbearably long discussion (read below).
There have been several attempts to abolish the caste system in India (from the inside and outside). Jaldhar has already discussed the (imperfect) role played by Vaishnavism in resolving caste issues. Arya Samaj is an example of a successful anti-caste movement (they are opposed to idolatry as well). Guru Nanak banned the concept of caste (one claim – from Sikhs themselves- is that he preserved caste function but outlawed caste inequality- supposedly the original spirit of the Varna-ashram). And off course Islam and Christianity do not have caste system in their “blood” and had the opportunity to establish caste-less society in India over a 1000 year rule (what a lost opportunity). Finally the communists, who came up with the simple formula: caste = class. They believe in a world-wide class system that exists so that they can overthrow it.
Zachary opines that Indians have internalized the fact that the Punjabi race (aka Pakasians in West Punjab today) is the bravest, boldest, fairest of them all. This is certainly believed by all Punjabis that I have met (my mother being an “honorary punjabi” will admit to thinking that way too). But then the Punjabis/Pakasian people have themselves internalized the caste system regardless of religion, specifically the pure/impure crap that is the essence of caste based discrimination.
Zachary’s second claim (quite justified) is that (upper-caste) Hindus wear caste on their sleeves. IMO the Sikh/Muslim/Christian/Communists play a different caste game, by denying that low caste denominations (and discrimination) exist (in their ranks)! The “upper caste” vs “lower caste” Muslim divide is as stark as any others. The pasmanda dalits claim that they are at an additional disadvantage since discrimination exists but there is no remedy (unlike Hindu dalits). Separate mosques, graveyards, political (under) representation. The goal remains the same though: total upper-caste domination.
Of the total religious minorities population more than 75% belongs to these “bulk” and less than 25% belong to the other category who are generally called ‘Ashraf’ or elite and ‘non-indigenous’. Less than 25% are getting more than 75 percent positions and more than 75 percent are getting less than 25 percent positions. This is the factual position. The figure of Muslim representation in parliament and legislatures also speaks the same truth…Now the Lok Sabha list of members is available under one binding from first to thirteenth lok sabha. One can minutely examine and find the names of backward muslims in the list, without much difficulty. From first to fourteenth Lok Sabha around 7500 members were elected but out of this only around 400 muslims could be elected, and out of this 400, 340 belong to Ashraf elites or Muslims of non-indigenous category. The representation of ‘bulk’ of backward muslims is only 60. The figure of Bihar Legislative Assembly is also available. From 1952 to 2000 only 276 Muslims could get elected and out of which 217 belong to Ashraf category and only 59 belong to non-Ashraf category.
The underlying (and most pernicious) message is that low castes are “impure.” This is true of Pakasia as well. It is not a coincidence that Kasab the terrorist comes from the Qassab (Kasai- butcher) caste. The front-line warriors doing the dirty jobs (literally) are going to be low-class and low-caste.
In this context, Omar’s statement that Punjabi converts were mostly upper-caste is instructive. The Syrian Christians also claim that they are all upper-caste converts (so are Catholics in Goa- one such gentleman informs me that they are all gaudiya saraswat brahmin- GSB- converts).
What about the Communists? In Bengal the leadership and the intellectuals is almost exclusively upper-caste. EMS Namboodiripad, the revolutionary leader from Kerala (leader of 1st/2nd elected commie govt in the world) was a super-Brahmin. Prakash Karat is a Nair. In contrast to these elites, the one man who is a moral giant is VS (Achutanandan) an Ezhava (OBC/Shudra). He was with the nationalists during the china war, and was demoted by EMS for his sins. The Communists have never been comfortable with his leadership. They hounded him out of the Politburo (2006) and tried denying him a ticket to the assembly (2011) even when he was one man that commanded respect of the rank and file as well as the common man (and has the results to back it up).
There are precious few luminous public intellectuals in SA from the S-M-X-C galaxy who proudly claim their original low-caste status (like Ambedkar). The one exception being religious leaders (from all caste backgrounds) who have spoken out against caste but their followers have not listened (well enough). The excuse peddled by the S-M-X-C communities is that while they do not believe in caste, individuals may do so (wrongfully). At any rate these religions are never at fault, whatever fault lies is with the trace influence from Hinduism. From a low caste perspective that looks, smells and talks like bullshit (The Golden Temple has symbolically four separate doors for the chatur-varna, none for dalits).
Zachary is speaking truth to power when he says that upper castes dominate Indian society even though they are 30% of the pop (similar to the Pasmanda ref above). But upper castes dominate Pakasia as well. If Sharukh Khan is the badshah of India today, Imran Khan will be badshah of Pakistan tomorrow. It is difficult to believe that lineage mattered for one and not the other (they are also superb professionals).
The disadvantage of wearing caste on your sleeves is that in today’s enlightened world you have to “talk progressive” or remain “defensive”. Pakasians have comfortably banished caste system in public and preserved it in private. Khaandaanii log have “pure” blood in them. That “pure blood” justifies domination, punjabi, pakasian domination. Domination over “impure” low-caste converts in Bengal for instance.
When pakasian elites decry (correctly) caste inequalities, they are merely following in the hallowed footsteps of Buddha, Chaitanya, Nanak, Dayanand Saraswati, Gandhi, Vinoba Bhave etc.* Upper-castes all, fighting (imperfectly) for their lower-caste brothers. But the Pakasians need to lead by example, creating a socialist republic in Pak where even a lowly Kasab can be a king. The beam in your brother’s eye is also the beam in yours.
regards
http://www.indianmuslimobserver.com/2011/11/total-muslim-reservation-lesson-to.html
*But not Jinnah who (allegedly) disowned his daughter over an impure marriage. Mahommedali Currim Chagla, Jinnah’s assistant at the time, recalls: “Jinnah, in his usual imperious manner, told her that there were millions of Muslim boys in India, and she could have anyone she chose. Reminding her father that his wife (Dina’s mother Rattan Bai), had also been a non-Muslim, a Parsi also coincidentally, the young lady replied: ‘Father, there were millions of Muslim girls in India. Why did you not marry one of them?’ And he replied that, ‘she became a Muslim’”. [Ref. Wiki]
Look, I’ve never been to India, but this whole caste discussion (over several threads) seems quite forced when discussing Pakistan. I’m no scholar of Pakistani society and probably have a fairly narrow window onto it having lived there only as a girl to age 18, but nonetheless it strikes me as–forced–to describe the low-class Katab as low-caste. Not really the way an urban Pakistani would categorize things (though I *kind of* get what you mean, but honestly only a little bit, and really not). Obviously all societies have class systems but I Think we are losing a category if we label, say, Mayflower descendents in the US as a “caste.”
FWIW I have had dinner in the homes of Hindu Brahmin immigrants in the US and the caste thing seemed unimportant to them, but of course this was not in India and there are work-related reasons to downplay this stuff so who knows, but they seemed like decent and non-discriminatory people. LoL they definitely did not appear to be serving me from different plates or anything!
Omar may clarify if this quotation is indeed valid: …..comments made by Yahya Khan to the journalist Robert Payne on 22 February 1971: “Kill three million of them, and the rest will eat out of our hands.” [Ref. Wiki]
If the above is indeed true (and there is a mountain of evidence pointing in that direction and not just from 1971) the only reasonable conclusion is that the Pakasian generals felt that Bengalis were part of a lowly race (Muslims intermingling with the Hindus and sharing Hindu customs) and could be exterminated at will (to teach them a lesson that they will never forget).
Also you did not respond to the question at the bottom. When will a Kasab like (nobody) figure rise up from the ranks and dominate Pak politics? In India Nitish Kumar, Mayawati and Mamata Banerjee are all from low class backgrounds and all powerful leaders who are in the queue for the next PM (there are many more, Modi is also an OBC).
The current PM-hopeful bench in Pak is lined up with aristocrats just like the Punjabi beauties (and the Beast) lounging on the sofa. If Islam is truly as egalitarian as it preaches why are there so many zamindars on the saddle?
regards
It’s obvious that the Pak. generals viewed Banglas as lower in ’71. Not sure where you’re going with that though. People in Pakistan today are not too concerned with the topic. Old news.
Don’t know a lot about Mayawati but that seems like an odd trend that would best be avoided by most nations, so I would hope the Kasabs of the world will never “rise up” and take power *as they are* (i.e., backwards idiots).
You are taking Islamic rhetoric way more seriously than me if you think it is inherently egalitarian-again, this view is coming from a baseline that is quite foreign to me. Of course Islamic culture has little to do with equality in any practical sense. LOL – look at 1400 years of history. . . .
South Asian politics is more dynastic than most however non-monarchic politics tends to be dynastic.
Remarkably in Britain there is a very famous Labour peer who went to court to remove his peerage so that he could serve in the House of Common. Not only was he a 3rd generation politician but his son serves in Blair’s cabinet.
Britain for all of its aristocracy gets it right; send them to the peerage so that a new breed of politicians take it over. Otherwise as we see politics soon becomes the play of Oxford and Eton grads (last 6 elected PMs have been Oxford; I also believe all 3 head of parties have been Oxford too).
http://www.social-europe.eu/2012/01/lonely-but-content-the-uk-one-percent/
“The bottom half of households could, no doubt with some regret, claim only seventeen percent of income before tax and a meager thirteen percent of net wealth (wealth being net real property value, stocks, bonds, and other paper assets). Way up at the other end, the top ten percent hauled in almost one third of all income and getting on toward half of wealth (44% to be exact). ”
So this is getting it right (for a first-world country which has imported wealth and exported prisoners over centuries)? Remember what your friend said, Western wealth is mostly inherited. Minus social and economic mobility caste =class indeed.
regards
In Pakistan we have class differentiations, not “caste” differentiations– As Sahar says, there is the difference between Pakistani and Indian societies and using “caste” to analyze Pakistan doesn’t make any sense.
Yes, our politics is dominated by the feudal aristocracy (Bhutto, Khar, etc) or by Punjabi business families (the Sharifs) but no one in Pakistan thinks about caste–at least not the way that Indians think about it. We do think about class, but that’s a different kettle of fish.
Right, thanks. Yeah, it’s just the wrong baseline to have in mind if you want to understand Pakistan to be on about caste. I don’t doubt one could trace some historical lineages, make some analogies, etc. but it would really be missing the picture and a weird lense for actually understanding things.
+1
Yes exactly / it’s trying to force an issue that doesn’t really equivocate too well across the border.
There is certainly rampant discrimination (both Khi/Lhr) but its a different phenomenon.
Pakistan must now only have the South Asian evils but also the evils of the Ummah on top.
Btw (@Sid) I did not claim anything the scene was in Vicky Donor. There is a habit of making “Zachary claims”, which is flattering but runs the unfortunate risk of not representing my views. Z
+1
However Ambedkar (God rest his soul; if only he had be PM of a united South Asia) did mention that because the non-Hindu communities did not accept the existence of caste it was actually more engrained.
Remember “dhobi”, “mali” (washer man and gardener) are caste lineages. Christian Dalit sweepers etc.
I dont think this will find many takers here, but institution of caste is complicated. This is not to say that there is no truth to popular narrative of oppressor upper caste and victim lower caste, but that there is more to it. Just to give an example TN where Brahmins have been completely politically marginalized since 70′s most of violence on Dalit has been perpetrated by Backward castes.
I think the reason caste has been so pervasive is, it is a Malthusian institution, and as the society turns schumpeterian caste or its noxious aspect will wither away.
@ sahar: It’s obvious that the Pak. generals viewed Banglas as lower in ’71. Not sure where you’re going with that though.
@ kabir: In Pakistan we have class differentiations, not “caste” differentiations
@ zachary: There is certainly rampant discrimination (both Khi/Lhr) but its a different phenomenon.
……………………………….
But then the Punjabis/Pakasian people have themselves internalized the caste system regardless of religion, specifically the pure/impure crap that is the essence of caste based discrimination.
Hafiz Mohammed Khalid Chishti, the imam of the mosque who allegedly issued a decree on his mosque’s loudspeaker to burn Christians of Mehrabadi village alive in the aftermath of 11-year-old Rimsha Masih being accused of blasphemy, denied instigating a hate campaign against the community. Chishti was said to have declared that, ‘All you chooras (a derogatory term for South Asian Christians) must leave here immediately or we will pour petrol on you and burn you alive …You sweepers are only deserving of such treatment.’
Why are Chooras “deserving” of such treatment? Hmmm (Zachary style)
How about this (also not dated from 1971)?
Asia Bibi describes the day of her arrest, June 14 2009. An illiterate Catholic farm worker from a remote Punjabi village, she had been harvesting berries on the estate of a wealthy landowner with her co-workers in 45 degrees heat. Parched, she drew water from the estate well, dipped her cup into the bucket and gratefully drank big mouthfuls. No sooner had the cup left her lips than one of the farm hands, “her eyes filled with hatred”, screamed out “Haraam!”, a term meaning “forbidden” in Islamic law. To the other workers, stirred by the commotion, she screamed: “This Christian has defiled the water from the well by drinking from our cup and by repeatedly plunging it into the well. The water is now impure. We can no longer drink it because of her.”
The water became impure because of what edict in Islam? Hmmm again.
There are many more references to the “pure/impure crap” from the Land of the Pure. And remember these people are semi-protected as “people of the book.”
regards
http://criticalppp.com/archives/225229
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/features/2012/06/14/ten-million-people-now-want-to-kill-me/
Ok, but who is denying that there is discrimination against Christians in Pakistan? They’re considered “impure” because they are not Muslim, and also because most Pakistani Christians tend to be lower-class. They are actually sweepers and janitors, etc. We had a Christian judge of the high court and no one would have called him a “choora”. It’s a class thing, but this is not what “caste” is in India.
And also, Pakistanis are part of the same civilization as (North) Indians and we share the same history. So obviously, there are certain notions that are similar. There are people who won’t let their servants use the same plates that the family uses, but that’s discrimination against someone for being a servant! Both parties may well be Punjabi Sunni Muslims, but one party is upper-class while the other isn’t. Pakistan is a feudal, class stratified society, fine– but “caste” as such is not an issue for us.
Big deal, India also had Dalit supreme court judges and a president. India also had a woman prime minister (as did Pak). However both countries are rated as one of the worst for women worldwide. It is all a big riddle wrapped up in an enigma.
Anyways your argument is an equal parts distillation of the communists (low caste = low class) logic and “hindu influence poisoned egalitarian islam” logic.
But from a Dalit’s standpoint what is the difference in these fine distinctions of “pure/impure crap” and why should he care? The only thing that matters to him is that he cannot access the water from a well because of something inherently evil in his birth-state (for which he cannot be held responsible). If it walks like a duck etc.
regards
It is not Sid – with respect you are making a false (and rather disingenuous dichotomy).
Two points; one the laughable assertion that SRK is “high-caste” in any real way. You do realise that surnames like Khan (even Latif) swirl about in the Pakistani population. When surnames were adopted the Indian/Hindu population basically took on their gotra/caste name whereas Iranians and Pakistanis (for the most part but now always of course) just used whatever.
Second point rather engage in sophistry please do this.
Take a similar picture of Pakistan elite/high society and deconstruct it as easily as I have done. You won’t be able to..
With respect Zachary, the story of the Dalits will be written by Dalits. They have the fundamental rights over that story, neither you nor I can buy them off.
regards
http://www.chandrabhanprasad.com/My%20Camp/Dalit%20Journalist.doc
In search of the Dalit Journalist; unfortunately I have been tapping away from my mobile so it hinder my access.
There is a ridiculous statistic of how Brahmin dominated Indian medial is (70% etc).
The false equivalence arises because in Pakistan we may have had Brahmin converts but there is no religious sanction for them; our maulvis do not need to be a certain caste.
Quoting Aakar Patel and his pseudo-scientific theories is not valid. The idea certain communities are more mercantile is simply bunk; it’s all about incentivisation, cultural priming and of course connections.
We are fed the world over that if we study hard we’ll succeed. This is not true for elite status it is still very much a function of birth (the world over). What you mention about Pakistan is applicable to the Third World; what marks off India as a distinct Casteocracy is :
(A) Indians retain their caste name
(B) religious (ergo cultural) sanction for caste.
India no doubt is changing but if you all did the Israeli solution (neutral Sanskrit surnames randomly adopted) it would go a VERY long way to ameliorating society.
When u can figure out caste instantaneously how can you overcome it?
I mostly agree with Sid in that the distinctions you are making between class/caste are purely academic and don’t reflect any reality. Also, regarding the statement from you, Sahar and Kabir, most (well off, upper caste) urban Indian youngsters would be hard pressed to identify castes from surnames, I actually know Indian brahmins who don’t know how which surnames are which caste other than their own and maybe a couple odd others. This obviously doesn’t mean caste discrimination doesn’t exist, the whole thing about privilege is that you don’t have to recognize it to benefit from it. There are tons of middle level OBCs who are hard at work keeping the Dalits down and a few key members of the upper society who know how to keep everyone in their place.
I remember a student telling a Dalit activist that he doesn’t even know his caste and his parents brought him up without any prejudices, and asking the activist why we should still have caste based reservation in “modern India”.
The Dalit activist’s response: “You can only have the luxury of not knowing if you are an upper caste. If you were Dalit the rest of society would have made sure you knew your caste.”
Something to think about?
Ghata put it best.
What is interesting that the Shining India Sinking Pakistan is so engrained that any criticism of India (for instance the Casteocray) must be dubbed as a South Asian issue whereas Pakistan may have all the ills and more.
Instead I’m impressed by how keenly deconstructed Pakistan is on every level by everyone (even fringe non-TNT views gets a healthy airing) whereas it is very difficult to even assess India on an impartial basis (especially difficult when on a subliminal level it is a goddess in its own right).
This makes me realise that Pakistan, for all of its many many many many many sins and faults, has a fighting chance since it is forced by the nature of its artifice and geography and circumstances to constantly plot a survival/pragmatic route as opposed to an idealistic.
Whereas urban (elite) (read upper caste) India just gripes on a constant blame game about everyone else. Caste quotas are “bad” (but they are only reflecting demographics nothing more), Muzzers are bad (is that why India has among the World’s highest malnutrition rates) and Pakistan is evil (is that why India engenders no great love among the rest of its neighbours?)
As commentators can remember I don’t brook the blame game/ I didn’t accept it from the Paks when they tried to escape the Malala issue and now we are seeing this about Indians and their Achilles Heel (caste).
Very simple
No caste = Indian Superpower
Caste quotas are “bad” – Indians have a democracy that has placed most caste quotas in the ninth schedule beyond the review of the Courts. It does not matter what some people say, the majority says it with their votes.
Muzzers are bad – Reflected by the fact that India is home to the third largest muslim population in the world.
Pakistan is evil (is that why India engenders no great love among the rest of its neighbours?)
Neighbourly love wise who loves Pakistan? China. Who loves China? North Korea and Pakistan. The first is a vassal state and the second is trying hard to be. How do you prove honest love from/between dependents and a guardian?
regards
India is perhaps only behind south africa in affirmative action.Poor sections of upper castes are heavily discriminated against
Caste and class do not always coincide.
Would the Brahmin marry his daughter to the rich Shudra or to his poor cousin? Frankly neither would be optimal but this is where caste and class do go separate.
It just so happens that millennia (te genetic differences persist) of caste segregation means that in most cases caste = class.
“It just so happens that millennia (te genetic differences persist) of caste segregation means that in most cases caste = class.”
I am curious as to how Pakistan avoided this process, since the partition happened only 60 years ago.
regards
Would the Brahmin marry his daughter to the rich Shudra or to his poor cousin?
- yes it does happen, not in progressive south or west but in the regressive cow-belt.
As soon as someone (caste no bar) clears IAS in the cow belt (UP, Bihar etc.), he gets matrimonial offers from even well off upper caste parents. There was a write-up ones, I will try digging it up.
“The Dalit activist’s response: “You can only have the luxury of not knowing if you are an upper caste. If you were Dalit the rest of society would have made sure you knew your caste.””
+1, the most measured response that I have heard (and agree with) is that even if the upper-castes (some of them) were not actively engaged in discrimination, they were given the space to grow and flourish (limited by foreign rule which was still not very effective at the local level everywhere).
Dalits did not have that “space” which they now have constitutionally but must keep fighting to get social recognition. More power to them.
regards