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
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