CASTE & CLASS


  CLASS  PLUS  CASTE 
  by
  REGINALD  YOUNG
Sociology/Politics/Geography
Class  plus  Caste
by
Reginald  Young
 For  Nazma, Mo, Tatiana and Liberty
 Copyright  ©  Reginald  Young  1995
All rights  reserved.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.
A catalogue record for this book is available
from the British Library.
Produced by Reginald  Young
           March 1995.               
Printed in the United Kingdom.
ISBN    1  899968  04  0

INTERACTION BETWEEN CASTE  AND CLASS
Marx and Weber on caste and class.
Caste and class as theoretical categories employed in analysing social stratification in human societies are fraught with complications and difficulties because of the various theoretical models involved. However, since real life processes are not governed by theoretical precepts that are not value free, it is important to lessen the degree of confusion to distinguish between form and content, categories, concepts and performance to comprehend and appreciate the changing intricate economic, ecological, cultural, social and political processes that are described, identified and related to caste and class.
Nevertheless, in periods of social crises and political conflicts, the margins of caste and class become blurred as individuals adopt autonomous groupings pursuing political and economic strategic interests in a dialectical process which the ‘Communist Manifesto’ declares as “an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight”. (E. Balibar, Page 160).
It is beyond the scope of this article to provide a comprehensive analysis of the various theories of social classes.
     However, class will be narrowly defined in relation to the means of production, and references will be made to examples of the caste system in India to establish whether caste is class in disguise.
According to Dr. Karl Marx classes consist of
[The owners merely of labour power, owners of Capital, and landowners, whose respective sources of income are wages, profit, and ground rent, in other words, wage-labourers , capitalists and landowners, constitute then three classes of modern society based upon the capitalist mode of production. . . . . Nevertheless, even here the stratification of   classes does     not appear in its pure form. Middle and intermediate strata even here obliterate lines of demarcation everywhere (although incomparably less in rural districts than in cities).  . . . .What constitutes a class!. . . . . At first glance the identity of revenue . . . . .   However, from this stand point, physicians and officials, e.g. would also constitute two classes, for they belong to two distinct social groups, the members of each of these groups receiving their revenue from one and the same source. The same would  also be true of the infinite fragmentation of interests and rank into which the division of social labour splits labourers as well as capitalists and landlords - the latter, e.g. into owners and owners of fisheries.]  -  Marx, page 885-6, Vol. iii, Capital.
Implicit from Marx’s exposition classes are defined in terms of their relationship to the means of production. That is land, mines, factories, machinery, raw materials and finance capital.
  Acknowledging that England represents a classical highly developed socio-economic structure, he emphasised that class stratification is not precise or clear-cut because of the existence of “middle and intermediate strata” groups.
Marx further explains that in the rural areas, as in India, the class stratification is “comparably  less”  blurred than in the modernised urban areas. More significant he offered a sophisticated conception of class by propounding that “physicians and officials e.g. would also constitute two classes”, and “the same would also be true of the infinite fragmentation of interests and rank into which the division of social labour splits labourers as well as capitalists and landlords”.
Here Marx definitely describes the social categories between the owners of the means of production and the propertyless which Max Weber described as status groups.
Weber also explained the hierarchical order produced by political power, and the ranking of individuals according to the amount of “esteem” they are given as members of the traditional aristocracy or occupation, education, and life style implicit in Marx’s exposition. Furthermore, Weber articulates status systems that are ascribed as structures of inheritance within families, as a form of caste system.
So, according to Weber,  as a social category, caste is an ascribed status, but economically the source of wealth or livelihood of a particular caste is inextricably linked to the means of production through occupation, status, ownership or non-ownership of resources as in the Marxian thesis on class.                                    
    In other words, the economic basis of the very productive existence of caste as a status group, is class - narrowly defined in relation to the means of production.
 Caste is class in disguise because no caste however defined or justified can exist without human beings, whose primary role is to survive by engaging historically in particular mode of production of which contradictions and conflicts do take place in the relations of production as humans attempt to resist exploitation by struggling to control the means of production.
 CASTE  - A feature of the culture of India.
INDIA - Profile
Area; 3,287,590sq km.
Capital; New Delhi.
Population; 844,000,000(1990), consists of a multitude of racial, cultural and ethnic groups. Most are descendants of the Aryan peoples who developed the Vedic civilisation and created a caste system so robust that it has survived the end of the Twentieth Century.
Religion; 83% of the population are Hindu, 11% Muslim, 2.5% Sikh. There are also Christian and Buddhist minorities.
Hindi is the official language as well as English. There are 16 regional major languages and an untold number of local dialects.
Trade Unionists consists of 10% of the total working population.
The most outstanding trade unions are:
INTUC - Indian National Trade Union Congress. It has over 4 million members and is affiliated to the Congress Party.
Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh -  It has a membership of over 2 million members and is affiliated to the Bharatiya Janata Party.
AITUC - All Indian Trade Union Congress. Its membership is over 1.5 million and is affiliated to the Communist Party of India.
CITU - Centre of Indian Trade Unions. It has over 1 million members and is affiliated to the Marxist Communist Party.
Economy: Per capita GNP: $300 (1987)
Annual growth: 3.1% (1980-87)
Major markets: Eastern Europe and USSR, 9%, U.S.A. 12%, Japan 10%.
External debt: $46,370 million (1987). Debt service consumed 24.0% of exports. (1987)
      India has the most developed caste system in the world. Traditionally, castes are relatively closed status groups whose members may eat together and each possesses a distinct name. These units are locally called jatis. Each Jati or sub caste is endogamous and has a traditional occupation associated with it.
The members of a Jati have a particular style of life and enjoy specific rights and privileges or are subject of certain duties and disabilities. There are many Jatis in any one cultural region.
While Jatis have most of the characteristics of groups, Varnas are essentially categories.
Jatis are to be distinguished from Varnas.
(1) Brahman - Priests
(2) Kshatriya - Warriors / Rulers
(3) Vaishyas -  Traders / Peasants
(4) Shudras - Servants / Labourers
(5) Dalit (also known as 'Untouchables') - street sweepers, cleaners
A caste is a hereditary, endogamous, usually localised group, having a traditional association with occupation, and a particular position in the local hierarchy of castes.
The caste system is alleged to be founded on the concept of purity and pollution. These qualities may be attached to persons, material objects, or activities and regulate relations between two or more persons.
Caste is a prominent structural feature of Hindu society in India. Every Hindu is born into a Jati or sub-caste.
The unit of endogamy is however the Jati. Every caste is a closed unit because caste membership is through birth, and in the social order of each caste is allocated a rank in a complex hierarchy of castes.                                       
The rank in the hierarchy is expressed with purity and pollution. Social contact with the lower castes can lessen the ritual purity of higher castes.
Members of higher castes are prohibited from touching, eating with, eat food that is cooked, or handled by lower castes. Vegetarian castes are given a higher ritual status over non-vegetarian castes.
 Among the non-vegetarians,  an individual who eats goat’s meat is considered superior to a pork or beef eater.
In fact, beef eating is considered the most polluting habit.
It is not difficult to identify the positions of Brahmans, the highest caste, whose habits and practices are the most exclusive.
Moreover to do work connected with death or body substances, like the work of the barber or washerman, gives the caste pursuing such an occupation a low status in the hierarchy of castes.
The lowest are the sweepers and leather workers belonging to the untouchable’s category who dispose of animals and human excreta. They are the only people who are supposed to eat beef and they are supposed to eat from the hearths of almost all other castes.
The castes between the Brahman and the untouchables in various parts of India and South India are referred to as the non-Brahman castes.
The commonly accepted rules of behaviour are more or less strictly enforced and those who break them are judged by a Penchayat (council) composed of caste or village mates. It imposes fines and in severest cases excommunicates the transgressor.
      Also social  sanctions are supported by the Hindu religious doctrines of Karma and Dharma.
The hegemony of Pax Britannia over the whole subcontinent for over 200 years brought about numerous changes to the traditional social structures of India.
Improvement in the infrastructure such as transport and communication made it possible for caste solidarity to extend beyond confined regional boundaries.
Introduction of a postal system enabled postcards to relay news of caste meetings. Railways facilitated caste members scattered in distant villages to come together. Furthermore, the accessibility of low cost newsprint encouraged the publication of journals that promoted the interests of the respective castes.
   The modernisation process initiated by the British produced diverse changes to the traditional social structure. Caste consciousness and solidarity were enhanced and reproduced over a pan-Indian dimension. 
Social mobility opportunities were created in the emerging class stratification system for the lower castes by the British policy of offering concessions, preferences and by empowering local self governing bodies.
The various castes were able to exploit fully their newly found social opportunities by forming alliances between castes that were close to one another to create larger caste groups.
Post independence political reforms in the form of universal adult suffrage stimulated the strength and significance of caste alliances as numerical advantages proved to be a decisive factor in the success or demise of electoral candidates in Parliament, the state legislature or the village Panchayat.
Casteism was the term given to the process whereby closely related castes formed alliances to pursue economic and political objectives. (R. Jayaraman, 1981).
Marx summarised the effects of modernisation on the Indian traditional caste system as:
“Modern industry, resulting from the railway system, will dissolve the hereditary division of labour, upon which rests the Indian castes, those decisive impediments to  Indian progress and . . . . power”. (Gould, page 57).
No doubt Marx words were fulfilled in 1947 by Ghandi and Nehru whose goal as nationalists were to achieve a modern, independent India that was free from the ascriptive occupational roles and immobile caste stratification social structures.
This modernisation process instead of dissolving “the hereditary division of labour”  integrated it within new divisions of labour created by the introduction of capitalist mode of production.
In Tamil Nadu when the British introduced English education and recruited administrators from the local people, the Brahman seized the educational opportunities and occupied administrative posts in large numbers. The Brahmans also usurped the political posts at all levels that were the result of scanty political reforms.                                 
 Brahmans monopolised urban administrative jobs and English Educational opportunities.
By 1920, the English educated leaders of the non-Brahmans’ castes were campaigning against the under-representation of their caste in political and administrative posts. In Madras non-Brahmans were keen to reduce the over representation of Brahmans in the educational services and in administration. In the urban areas also non-Brahmans demanded more representation in legislative assemblies and district boards.
The phenomenon of casteism as stated by R. Jayaraman, if analysed superficially without appreciating the underlying processes involved, can veil the rational choices and the political and economic  strategies of caste members .
In other words, in their struggle to improve political and socio-economic conditions, castes’ members use caste idioms to mobilise caste struggle.
 These apparent caste struggles are in reality the consequences of essentially  complex economic objectives and socio-economic inequalities, thereby illustrating   seeming caste struggles with or disguising socio-economic class  interests, conditions, contradictions,  and conflicts.
In other words it is not just a simple matter of what caste is,  but how caste identity  is employed to organise, signify,  and mobilise covert socio-economic interests that can be defined in class terms.
In this restricted sense, caste as a social category could be defined as class as a descriptive socio-economic group, and a political process forming a social movement.
The non-Brahman’s movement against the dominant position of Brahmans in politics and administration did not target all economic inequalities and ritual distinctions among castes.
Those who benefited were some leading non-Brahman castes such as Kowandan and Padayachi of Tamil Nadu and Karma; and Reddi of Anahra Pradesh, all derive considerable economic, educational and political benefits.
The movement in conjunction with industrialisation and urbanisation did diminish considerably the harsh discriminatory practices of touch and contact pollution against the traditional polluting caste groups such as Nadar, Shanan and Harijans.
Marx asserted that
            [The very moment civilisation begins, production begins to be founded on the antagonism of orders, estates classes and finally on the antagonism of accumulated labour and actual labour. No antagonism, no progress. This is the law that civilisation  has followed up to our day.]   -              D. Mclellan, page 196.
        CASTE AND CLASS FUSION
So, in terms of the fusion of caste and class, and the ensuing caste-class struggles. It was generally acknowledged that caste was fixed and permanent, while class is mobile.
Caste cut across class and visa versa.
There is no conversion under Hinduism nor is there promotion or demotion. There are poor Brahmans as there are prominent non-Brahmans in terms of class. Because of the rigid Hindu caste society the rich individuals of low castes obtain no privileged status which comes only out of birth.
Uma Ramaswamy conducted a study among workers at the Coimbatore Mill. He reported that the trade unionists controlled by the CPM and CPI were not above castes.   Ramaswamy states;
           [The Harijan argues that there is more discrimination in the Union than in the factory. Although Harijan leaders exist, the climb for them is a difficult one. Most people resent being led by Harijans. There are various ways of keeping them out of the leadership.]   - EPW - Feb., 1979, Annual number, page 371- from L.S. Shetty, 1980.
Shetty exposed the paradox among some Marxists whose definition of class is somewhat superficial, narrow and inflexible, and whose political opportunism reduces Marxism to an ideology - a mere empty phrase - justifying the maintenance, reproduction and perpetuation of their caste privileges as Brahmans when he asked
            “How is it that some Brahmans among the Marxist leadership get so furious when Brahmans are attacked?”  (Shetty, page 8).
The untouchables experience double disadvantages, economically in the form of poverty, and socially through the caste oppression, making them the poorest of the poor and the lowest of the low as victims of both the caste and class systems.
      The unusual feature of caste cutting across class in Hindu dominated India has influenced the response of political and socio-economic organisations operating at all levels of society, in both the urban and rural areas.
These major organisations representing the immediate interests of their members were compelled to structure their organisational strategies in narrow terms, thus creating inevitable conflicts within and between castes and classes.
    CLASS AND CLASS STRUGGLE
Class struggle advocates such as the CPM and CPI perceived their objectives as being part of the global class struggle. In India they advocate the intensification of the class struggle which will lead to political and social revolution, industrialisation, and economic development which would eventually abolish the caste system.
Class struggle advocates have achieved robust support in states such as Kerala, West Bengal and Tipura, and minor support in other states despite their existence for over 40 years.
During elections they have been unable to obtain more than 10% of votes. The movement prospects are undermined by divisions.
The biased economic strategies of the affiliated trade unions tend to prioritise at the expense of political objectives of challenging the wage’s system and the socio-economic caste structures.
     This policy obviously benefits the organised urban industrialised worker who secures higher incomes and other perks, while the living conditions of the illiterate, poor, landless labourers of the rural regions are disregarded.
The dogmatic class struggle approaches of the major trade unions have excluded the lower caste groups and ignored their problems and oppression. They have been accused of betraying employees from caste and tribal groupings while compromising with the employers.
This narrow attitude and objectives of the class struggle organisations stimulated the excluded workers from the various castes and tribal areas to form or join caste struggle based organisations.
            CASTE AND CASTE STRUGGLE
The caste struggle movement was establish to confront the high castes and challenge the prevailing socio-economic system.
Formed by Dr. Ambedkar and Periyar E.V. Ramaswamy the caste struggle organisations gained support mainly in the South. They achieved huge political successes in the state of Tamil Nadu. Non-Brahmans and lower castes such as Shudras have been able to achieve political power and expelled the Brahmans from dominant positions.
   By 1979 there was no Brahman in the Tamil Nadu Assembly until in 1980 when one Brahman was recruited thus breaking the 15 year non-Brahman policy.
The caste struggle organisation - Periyar’s Draviaian movement was confined to the state of Tamil Nadu because it was based on the Tamil language which became a limitation in expanding in other areas.
The caste struggle based movement became a populist movement under Ambedkar’s influence across the whole of India.
Being an untouchable himself, a fluent English speaker, central Cabinet minister and a barrister status, he was recognised as the leader of the lower castes.
His caste struggle proposals tripled constitutional reservations in jobs, admission to educational institution, and reserved seats in elections.
Hundreds of untouchables and tribals have achieved upward social mobility.
Success of this populist caste struggle movement did not benefit the majority of untouchables but at least on an individual basis caste membership did not halt class membership and mobility.
In the rural areas of India despite the abolition of the Zamindari and other forms of intermediate land tenure-ship, the pattern of capitalist private ownership of property remains intact. Land reform legislation failed to lessen inequality in land ownership, by distributing land to the landless labourers and the Harijans.
The Green Revolution benefited the powerful landowners who had access to credit facilities that enabled crops to double or triple their yields.
      Government subsidised low irrigation water rates to rich farmers who also benefited from other inputs such as improved seeds and fertilisers.
The Green Revolution succeeded in the Punjab and Tamil Nadu states where landless labourers, petty landowners and poor tenants have not reaped the benefits of its success.
K. Gough  made a study of classes in Thanjavur and Kerala and presented five categories of classes and their corresponding characteristics.
They are landlord, rich peasant, middle peasant, poor peasant and landless labourer.
He concluded that in Thanjavur the higher castes such as Brahman, Vella, Mudaliar and Lallan belong largely to the landlord and rich peasant classes, while the lower castes such as Dallas, Paraiyan and Chakkiliym belong to the poor peasant and the landless labour class. (R. Jayaraman, page 45.)
Today the Harijans represents the majority of the landless agricultural labourers in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, thus forming 80% of the labour force earning poor wages.
Some Harijan work as tenants or sharecroppers to bid land owners without much success in improving their economic situation.
Few own small plots of land with low output thus making their position similar to that of tenants and share croppers. 
Recently Harijan landless workers in rural areas have been engaging in direct political activities to improve their economic position through collective bargaining.
Well-organised robust unions were formed and they were able to successfully oppose extreme forms of exploitation and discrimination, often under circumstances of violence and bloodshed.
                                                           CONCLUSION
Theoretically, the conceptual, categorical and analytical models of caste and class are subject to unpredictable constant changes due the unique complex historical, cultural, political, socio-economic, ecological and historical processes that interact dialectically with the different, varied and unequal modern and pre-modern modes of production that constitutes the multi-dimensional aspects of the development of modern India and elsewhere where caste and class systems interact.
In other words, conceptually, and descriptively caste can be postulated as class in disguise when caste is defined as a social class category in general terms to outline the unequal hierarchical social stratification  of a community.
 In terms of objective analysis, historical specificity and prescriptive approaches caste is not easily reduced to class in general or in disguise, for the caste system is a product  or consequence of a definite particular historical socio-economic pre-modern mode of production.
If class is defined socio-economically in terms or ownership, power and control within the modern capitalist  mode of production then class is not easily reduced to caste, for the class system is relatively more mobile than the caste system, class location and security are based on merit, access to market opportunities and social democratic state interventions by competing political interests, while caste status and authority are determined and regulated by act of birth, religious rituals, cultural codes and inherited property rights.
     Modernisation in India today is imposing new socio-economic class stratifications as an increasing population demands more economic resources, thereby creating tensions within and between the predominant capitalist class based structures and the traditional caste structures.
Most membersof  higher castes have been able to secure access to the disproportionate amount of wealth, incomes, status and power that the class system has been able to reproduce, thereby monopolising material and intellectual resources to perpetuate and justify the features of the dominant status quo that maintains, perpetuates and reproduces discrimination, inequality and exclusion of the poor, powerless, subordinate social classes and caste groups.
Although the ever changing, dynamic, modern class based capitalist mode of production, distribution, and exchange system predominate, casteism is subjectively maintained by some individuals who opportunistically secure and gain access to resources, prestige and power produced by the various modes of production prevailing in the national economy.
Subjectively, this results in a complex web of caste formations cutting across class affiliations, castes appear to mask class as  members of prevailing castes struggle for economic, social and political advantages within modern class based capitalist dominated environments. In other words, caste (subjective) not only disguises class (objective), it  also divides class (subjective), reproduces  socio-economic class inequality  and is class (as a descriptive status group)  in disguise.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
‘Caste and Class’ by Raja Jayaraman, Hindustan Publishing Corporation (India), Delhi, 1980.
‘Caste - Class Struggle’ by V.T.R. Shetty, 1980
‘The Hindu Caste System’ by Harold Gould, Chanakya Publishing Corporation (India), 1980.
‘Capital’ Volume iii, by Karl Marx Lawrence and Wishart, 1984.
‘Karl Marx Selected Writings’ by David Mclellan,   Oxford University Press, 1987.
‘Race, Nation, Class’ by Etienne Balibar and Immanuel Wallerstein, Verso, 1991.
'Third World Guide 93/94'.

No comments:

Post a Comment

V I D E O S

                                                        Diana&Terminator 24 - 2009 Why Don't You Go To Heaven? - 14/09/2008?   Evang...