Indian society: when will you be civil enough?

A heart-wrenching article on atrocities on dalits has appeared in yesterday's DNA. In Maharashtra, the report says, dalits are not free even to bury their dead. I have visited many places throughout the country but what I never noticed that burial ground was such an issue. Also, I did not know that Sikhs too practice casteism, that too of a highly despicable kind. Just read this:

Though Dalits form 30% of Punjab’s population, and though Sikhism frowns on discrimination in the name of caste or creed, untouchability against the Mazhbis and Ramdasias, the two Dalit castes among Sikhs, is well established. They have been forced to live in separate settlements, contemptuously called thhattis or chamarhlees, and forced to reside on the western side, away from the main area of the villages, so that the winds blowing over them don’t pollute the upper castes. All the Sikh organisations, from Sikh temples to the political parties, are under the control of the Jat Sikhs, who refuse to consider Dalit Sikhs equals even after death. The former disallow cremation of the latter’s dead in the main cremation grounds. Over the years, such harsh discrimination has forced Dalits to establish separate gurdwaras, marriage places and cremation grounds. This, in many ways, is the biggest paradox of Sikhism, which is often characterised as ‘emancipatory’ and ‘revolutionary’.

Full article is available here: DNA's dalit burial ground report

Why we hail Times of India stand on caste reservation

The Times of India carries a brilliant editorial today, titled, Reservation as a welfare tool is past its sell-by-date. On Jat agitation, the editorial argues in favour of a genuine affirmative action and a stop to reservation politics.

Many pro-reservationists, who are either convinced that only caste-based reservation can emancipate the socially backward castes or who have a vested interest in continuance of the reservation system will – as usual – call the Times of India arguments a pro-upper caste [मनुवादी] and ivory-tower approach to the issue. 

India News Today feels that many progressive thinkers, including those from the reserved categories, are against perpetuation of caste, and are in favour of an all-inclusive model of social and economic development. But they do not have individual or collective strength to prevail over the pro-caste forces in the present environment of competitive vote-bank politics, poor statesmanship and lack of courage for reforms.

India News Today has earlier too discussed caste in these posts. Do click here to see them.

bihar elections and a reality check

Bihar elections in 2010 have proved some 'myths' and disproved some 'facts'. The most, it is making people give extreme judgements on caste, development, Nitish's charm, etc etc.

India News Today gives below some ground realities that need to be kept in mind while judging Bihar elections.

•  In Bihar, caste remains a strong reality. Caste here means [unlike in metros and big towns where youth from the 'higher castes' seem to have a genuine grudge against 'reservationists' taking away their jobs without fair competition] deprivation and humiliation versus economic dominance and muscle power.

• Nitish was not a caste-less politician. He rather cultivated some castes too well. His casteism has been different from Lalu-Paswan casteism in that (i) he has tried to reach the economic benefits to the castes he's sought to favour more than others; (ii) in doing so, he has not discriminated against other castes; and (iii) his social justice has gone to the needy and downtrodden, not to his kin and his own community.

•  Bihar still remains a poorly-developed state. In Nitish's rule, roads, electricity, children's enrolment in school, primary health etc have got a boost, but the benefits have reached sparsely and have not reached many parts of the state. Nitish has not been able to implement many recommendations for social and economic development, but his overall score is commendable.

• Bihar politics will also remain criminal infested, whichever party comes to power. JD(U), with the biggest seat share has also the largest number of criminals getting into the Legislative Assembly. 

• In the current elections, the NDA has got just 39% of the votes polled. The constituent parties, JD(U) and BJP,  have got only about 3 percent vote swing in its favour. Yet, this is significant. NDA has not only retained its support base, it has brought in fence-sitters. This, despite the usual anti-incumbency factor that would go againt the ruling formation if it did not perfom well. There was no anti-Lalu wave but Nitish's genuine-sounding contrast of his own rule with that of Lalu-Rabri rule seems to have made people think. 

• Nitish's win is as much a vote in favour of his image and his work, as it is his keen political acumen supported by a sensible poss strategy. There was opposition from within his party as he did not favour the partymen too much during his rule; his alliance with BJP was a double-edged sword.

• Poll alliances do matter: had BJP- JD(U) combine split, BJP would sure have lost some seats and so would JD(U). Not to talk of sentiment, even by simple arithmetic it would have harmed the constituent parties. For example, BJP would have to fight elections in more seats than it fought [102] and wold not have won there but would have taken away some of JD(U) seats. On the other hand, in the 91 constituencies that it has won, it would have had to suffer fight with JD(U) instead of getting voter and party support. 

• It is only a matter of speculation whether Lalu-Congress-LJP combine would have given a bigger challenge to Nitish-BJP. However, it is logical that people would have thought of it as an alternative to Nitish. Some undecided lot might have jumped towards them and given them a few more seats. Besides, as argued above, the non-NDA votes would not have got divided so badly. 

• The fracturing of votes partly due to Congress and RJD not going together has resulted in smaller parties getting a whopping 27 percent vote share.

• Direct benefit of a scheme to those for whom this is life-changer seems to pay instant dividend: It is widely believed that the NREGS helped UPA win for the second term. In the case of Bihar, teacher recruitment, providing dress to the policemn and salaries to teachers, school enrolments, giving cycles to girl students, cash benefits for cleanliness etc given by Nitish government must have influenced poor voters a great deal. Similarly, a good law and order situation must have influenced middle class and women. Such influences seem to cut across party and community lines.

• When people get fed-up with violence and poor governance, they would brave difficulties and threats to teach the wrong-doers a lesson. They defied Maoist threats and thronged to poliing booths in large numbers, and they didn't forgive Lalu-Rabri and their musclemen kin. Earlier, they seemd to have wilted under threat from musclemen, but this time they gave the muscles two hoots. As much as clean governance, people seem to vote for clean image of the leader [in Western context, it would mean more in the sense of sexual relationships] when other things are equal. Since the voting population in India is mostly a victim of routine corruption, the slur of dishonesty sticks life-long on politicians.

• Timing of campaigns also matters. Congress suffered for many reasons. One of them could be too early and small-time entry of Rahul Gandhi on the scene. His impact might have been washed away by Nitish's subsequent showing.

such a grand victory, nitish babu!!

India News Today knew and almost everybody knew [except Rabri and Lalu - if you don't know them, they are husband wife team of buffalo-shepherds from Bihar] that Nitish will win by a comfortable margin. But Nitish has done much better than all predictions and expectations by winning 204 out of 243 seats.

There will be great debates and analyses on why the oppositon was so badly routed, why Prince Rahul's charm did not work, which area worked for whom and so on, but the most plausible reasons for the outcome will sure be:

• too much family and 'jaat' linkages in RJD-LJP: none of Lalu clan has won.
• visible development: road repairs and new roads, more jobs, less migration, more children enrolment in schools - all are visible, however patchy they may be.
• less crime: the 'goonda raj' of Lalu period is much under control, better overall law and order situation.
• less casteism, though in Bihar of the day, caste equations are important; also, less discrimination on caste basis.
• better administrative support as the official machinery is less frustrated and less Lalu-ised.
• Rahul's rhetoric looked too distant.
• 'Pipli live': was it one of the factors, though a marginal one?

India News Today's earlier posts on Bihar elections / politics were:
Nitish coming back; Lalu's lalten dims
Bihar elections: jaat, in-laws, outlaws

Bihar elections: jaat, in laws, outlaws

For political observers, it looks very normal that Bihar elections are once again going to be fought on caste and communal lines. Within that, it is the blood relation with entrenched politicians and muscle power are what matter. There is hardly any chance of a modern agenda such as development, honesty/corruption, societal issues and reforms taking centre-stage, though hollow slogans around 'aam-aadmi' [common man] will be coined and raised.

As of now, a number of re-alignments are taking place but these are of minor consequence. The major political formations seem to be more or less settled: the ruling JD(U)-BJP alliance with Nitish Kumar and Sushil Modi at the helm; RJD of Lalu Prasad Yadav, joining hands with LJP of Ram Vilas Paswan; Congress with no big leader but Rahul Gandhi’s charisma to ride on.

As expected, the selection of candidates by different parties is going mostly on the basis of caste equations in the constituency. Second most important criterion is winnability among the candidates shortlisted on the basis of caste. Relationship with top party functionaries is another major criterion: the closer the relation, the better. About one-fifth of the nominations in the first phase of elections are from relatives of politicians. This time, the relationship criterion has been further refined: parties are accommodating relatives of even politicians of the opposing parties. Personal integrity is a liability, even among parties that swear by morals. In fact, one’s image as a formidable goon scores much over honesty: voters seem to be voting more out of fear than regard for moral values or their own welfare. A winning combination is the wife of a criminal: you have a woman, husband's muscle, relationship - all in one.

A rough analysis of the candidates in the fray for the first phase by NGO shows that about one third candidates have a criminal record, going by their own affidavits filed before the Election Commission, and one fourth have serious cases against them. This is likely to be the tip of the iceberg as far as information about criminality of candidates goes, because (i) no one is likely to expose his criminality if he can hide it, (ii) people do not file FIRs or file court cases against criminals out of fear, (iii) the numbers reported are only the cases filed; with roots in police, mafia, administration and politics, many criminals do their activities indirectly, without a smear on their clothes.

caste: casting india in outdated mould

The seal has been affixed: caste will be counted in the 2011 census.

The GoM under the Finance Minister has recommended to the cabinet that every citizen be asked about his/her caste. The caste enumeration will be done at biometric phase, covering photographing, fingerprinting and iris mapping of all citizens over the age of 15 for the National Population Register.

For months, the issue of inclusion or not of caste in the census has been hotly debated within and outside parliament. Spearheaded by OBC leaders, this issue had parties, even union cabinet, divided. But the fear of losing votes of OBCs who feel that they will benefit from caste census as their numbers will swell, made all parties agree for it. Logic, even of the Home Minister, against caste enumeration just sank in the caste din.

What caste enumeration does to India will be worth watching. It may remain a numerical - statistical dud exercise, with no clear data emerging due to enormous sub-division of castes. It might become a farce exercise also due to the population dynamics of caste [not cast politics]. It may raise feelings like the Mandal Commission report did. It may benefit or harm some castes, though harm is most unlikely.  It may be the nemesis of Indian society, dividing it vertically into fiercely zingoistic identities. It might, though not very likely, make caste irrelevant by showing economic paparmeters more important than caste. Etc, etc. It is claimed that the data so generated will help in pinpointing the socially backward and channelising the benefits to them in a better way, but hardly ever has such data helped in wise social-economic decision making.

Going by sheer logic and national interest, one would perhaps go 70:30 in favour of not having the cast census since the possible hazards far outweigh any benefits. But have logic and pure public interest [as distinct from sectoral interests ] ever prevailed in competitive democracy?

Let's wait. By the way, is there any other option?