Its time for a Bahujan rethink

Image Courtesy: Hindustan Times
 
Understand the political and social construct

Bahujan politics is not new to India. Based on the reality of caste and social backwardness a (political) strategy (for organisation) appears to have been developed, based on crucial factors. While the fundamental issue behind the mobilisation was the opposition to the upper castes, the goal set included earning a share in political power. The kindling of caste identities among followers of Bahujan formations was also important.
 
(Over the past decades), this Bahujan politics has been getting considerable support. A process has been evident: the coming together of various backward castes on a strong identity and sentiment, entering the electoral fray, and thereafter, also splitting on similar grounds;  leading to the inevitable political splintering. The sense of identity of respective castes or sub-castes works as the common factor in forging unity and (causing) disunity, cohesion and dispersal.
 
The splintering of the Republican Party of India in Maharashtra is a case in point. The sub-groups within the Mahar caste are considered to be the reasons or basis behind this splintering. Dr. Ambedkar was himself defeated in the elections to the Bhandara  Loksabha constituency in Vidarbha! One main reason for this is purported to be the difference between Dr. Ambedkar’s sub-caste and that of the bulk of the voters there.
 
History
 
If we are to understand a concept properly, we need to understand its history; we should know the changes in it and the causes behind those changes. We should be able to separate circumstantial causes from subjective causes. We should be able to separate the right tendencies from the wrong ones and point to a further advancement.  To develop this kind of understanding, we need to go back to Mahatma Phule.
 
The concept of Bahujan becomes amply clear even if we map it in terms of inclusion, exclusion and opposition. Phule advanced three pivotal points (axis’) for his definition – the shudra, the atishudra and women. He opposed what he called “Shethji and Bhatji”, the  moneyed class and the Brahmin priest.
 
Phule used the language of those whom he wanted to organise. Therefore we need to understand the meaning of the words he used and update them from the present time and context.
 
Shahu, the people’s king, advanced his own concept, which is evident in his 1902 ordinance giving 50 per cent reservation in his state to backward castes. He defined the Bahujan in this ordinance as ‘all those excluding Brahmins, Prabhus and Shenvis’. The followers of Mahatma Phule established the first Non-Brahmin Party in Maharashtra and began organising non-Brahmin castes. Shahu was the leader of this movement. The formation was based on the opposition to Brahmin caste and unity of all the remaining castes.
 
Vitthal Ramji Shinde was against the division along this axis of ‘Brahmin – non-Brahmin’. We need to discuss this in detail.
 
Dr. Ambedkar founded different political parties at different times To further different objectives. His concept of the Bahujan becomes clear from the names he gave to those parties – the Independent Labour Party, Scheduled Castes Federation and the Republican Party.
 
Speaking to G. I. P. Railway Workers at Manmad in 1938 he said, “Brahminism and Capitalism are our two enemies”. One recalls Phule’s terms – Shetji and Bhatji. We must not forget that Dr. Ambedkar used Brahminism and not just Brahmins. Similarly, Phule’s terms point at the professions of those castes or classes. Shetji suggests the profession of money lending and Bhatji suggests the ‘priestly’ profession (not Brahmins, the people/individuals).
 
The first manifesto of the Dalit Panther Party takes Dr. Ambedkar’s definition further to clarify concretely his concept of Brahminism and Capitalism.
 
Kanshiram–Mayavati’s concept becomes clear from a slogan Kanshiram developed before he founded the Bahujan Samaj Party. The slogan was: Baman, Baniya, Thakur Chor; Baki sab DS4. DS4 meant Dalit Shoshit Samaj Sangharsh Samiti. Although the name of the organisation contains the word Shoshit, the exploited, the meaning of the slogan is very clear. There are no exploited, shoshit, among the Baman-baniya-Thakur castes, and if at all there are exploited among them we are not concerned with them. Everybody among the castes belonging to Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishyavarnas are exploiters; none of them is exploited. If at all there are any, we are not bothered; such is this position.
 
Basing the strategy of uniting Bakward Castes (BC’s) and Other Backward Castes  (OBC’s) and opposing the rest, Kanshiram founded the Bahujan Samaj Party(BSP) on April 14, 1984. The BSP is a distinct political party, especially in electoral politics. Since it uses the word, its intention of widening its base and scope becomes evident.
 
Congress, Socialists, Communists and other parties have been claiming to further politics of the downtrodden, even for the emancipation of the Dalits. They have been raising their (Dalit) issues and fighting for them. But that is a different discussion. They do not base their politics on only ‘caste’ as a unit and have never been confined to doing politics of raising the issues of the backward castes alone.
 
Vitthal Ramji Shinde’s concept of the Bahujan
 
V. R. Shinde published the manifesto of the Bahujan Samaj Paksha on September 1,  1920. In it he has defined very clearly the scope, organisation, objective etc. of this party.
 
It is necessary to explain the background of the foundation of this party. The programme of elections to the provincial assembly, which had limited powers,  had been declared. The electoral roll of the voters too was very limited. Members to general and reserved seats were to be elected. The reserved seats included a group consisting of ‘Maratha and similar castes’. There were seven seats reserved for this group in Bombay Province. There were also reserved seats for other categories.
 
There is an interesting anecdote. The elections to the Provincial Assembly were in the November of 1920. A meeting of various groups from the Maratha community was held at Jedhe Mansion in Pune. V. R. Shinde firmly declared at the meeting that “I will not contest on the reserved seat since I am against the caste system”. Actually, Shinde was Maratha by caste. But he was opposed to contest on the seat reserved for the Maratha caste. Another leader, N. C. Kelkar, a follower of Tilak, was Brahmin, but he was the editor of the journal Maratha. He claimed that since he ran a paper called Maratha he should be selected for that seat. This is an example of the typically Poona-ite logic.
 
On the other hand, Shahu’s reaction to Kelkar’s claim is typically Kolhapuri. He wrote a letter to Shinde in which he made fun of Kelkar. Shahu writes, “(I can answer Kelkar’s logic.) Suppose I name my bullock ‘Britannia’, my favourite horse ‘Turkish Flag’ and my cow ‘Japanica’ would it be proper for me to claim the leadership of Japan or Turkey?”
 
Shahu tried to persuade Shinde to contest from the reserved seat. But Shinde stood his ground, inspite of Shahu’s insistence. He contested from the general seat and was defeated. Shahu supported another candidate, one Gupte, and got him elected. This action on part of Shinde indicates his concept of Bahujan. This was already clearly defined in his manifesto of the Bahujan Party and it left no scope for ambiguity.

The concept of Bahujan becomes amply clear even if we map it in terms of inclusion, exclusion and opposition. Phule advanced three pivotal points (axis’) for his definition – the shudra, the ati-shudra and women. He opposed what he called “Shethji and Bhatji”, the moneyed class and the Brahmin priest.

Shinde founded the Bahujan Party against the background of these elections. His manifesto is actually an exposition of various ‘interests’. He pointed out that the parties and organisations founded on the basis of castes and sub-castes orient their practice towards ‘sentiments’ (identity, in contemporary parlance). Their practice was not based on their social and economic interests. The castes brought together by these parties have their respective interests, and also within the castes there are various separate interests. Yet, they unite as castes. There are sections within castes outside them which have identical interests with the sections in another caste. But there was a general tendency of ignoring these identical interests dispersed in various castes.
 
That is why Shinde wrote in his manifesto, “the Bahujan Party does not stand merely on vacuous sense of identity but on solid interests. The Party undertakes to unselfishly support and encourage those interests. . . . Our colleagues may be Brahmins or non-Brahmins, they could be moderates or extremists, and they could be even Indians or foreigners . . . as long as they honestly and strongly support these interests we would cooperate with them. Otherwise we will bid adieu to them.”
 
The breadth of vision of his Party is evident when he identifies the sections he wants to organise: “Indian populace can be divided politically in two parts. One class advanced in knowledge, wealth and authority; and the other class backward in all these respects, or, Bahujan samaj.”
 
Shinde’s division is very clear. It is not based on the varna or caste distinction alone. It is based on the possession of three powers – knowledge, wealth and authority. It is obvious that the so-called advanced castes also have sections within them which do not possess these powers of knowledge, wealth and authority. These sections also become part of Shinde’s definition of the Bahujan. This is important. Some sections within the backward castes are also acquiring the powers of knowledge, wealth and authority. These cannot be included in Shinde’s concept of Bahujan. This is the reason why he firmly rejected to be called Brahminetar – Non-Brahmin.
 
Concepts like non-Brahmin, non-Maratha are once again being advanced in Maharashtra. These words are being used to indicate castes determined by birth. As the use of caste words/descriptions have become problematic owing to the constitutional provisions, political parties are wary of using them in in their names. They try to circumvent constitutional constraints. The fact is that there are separate political parties and organisations in Maharashtra championing the sectarian interests of various castes, both advanced and backward. Once the veil is thrown open, the caste concealed within is laid bare.
 
Shinde included eight classes (varga is Shinde’s word) within the ambit of his Bahujan Party. They were:
 

 
We have noted how Shinde excluded the powerful and dominant sections among these categories from his concept of Bahujan.
 
The task ahead
 
Various parties basing on caste identities are trying to test their electoral strength even today. They are dividing society on the basis of caste and religious identities instead of uniting them around common ‘interests’. They use the names of Phule and Ambedkar. Let them do so. But they should seriously take into account Vitthal Ramji Shinde’s concept of Bahujan. If they do not find it useful, they are free to reject it. But they should reject it after serious consideration. They should reject it on empirical evidence; if it is possible to do so. My only appeal is Vitthal Ramji Shinde should not be ignored. It will not be in the interests of the Bahujans. Many do not include Shinde’s name along with Phule–Shahu –Ambedkar. This is being unjust to him.
 
(Translated from Marathi by Dr. Uday Narkar; excerpted from The Republic of Reason published by SAHMAT, New Delhi and released on November 1, 2015; we have edited the copy)