From August 31– September 4, when the World Conference Against Racism, Racial  Intolerance, Xenopho bia and Related Intolerances(WCAR) meets in Durban, the first time since the discriminatory and centuries old regime of apartheid was overturned through much sacrifice and struggle in that country, another group of subordinated peoples, discriminated by descent and occupation, forcibly segregated by tradition and religion from access to common resources, will make their voice heard before the international community. 

They will demand that caste-based discrimination, which amounts to descent and occupation based oppression, segregation and exclusion be recognised as a distinct form of racism. A distinct form of racism, because it amounts to the denial of basic human rights based on prejudice, discrimination or antagonism and is justified by well–entrenched beliefs about high and low, superior and inferior. 

A wide network of Dalit groups from within and outside India will voice this demand on behalf of 160 million Indians. They will make their case through public testimonies of victims and documents drawn up by the National Campaign for Dalit Human Rights — NCDHR.

Predictably, there have been strong attempts by the Indian government to resist the bid to raise the issue of caste discrimination in an international forum. At the preparatory meeting for the WCAR, on February 19 in Teheran, the government made it’s stand clear — introducing caste into the ambit of the WCAR at Durban would amount to diluting the concept of racism. The government delegation was represented, among others, by the attorney general, Soli Sorabjee. More significantly perhaps, government spokesmen stressed that the problem of caste was an ‘internal’ one and therefore out of the purview of the UN.

Using his weekly column in The Times of India, (March 4, 2001) to emphasise the government’s position, Sorabjee endorsed the overall rationale behind the theme of the forthcoming conference;an acknowledgement that “no country is immune from the virus of racism whose roots lie in the hearts and the minds of the people”. He mentioned the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ECERD) convention but commented on the “misconceived attempts by some NGOs to equate racism with caste–based discrimination which is based on birth and occupation and has nothing to do with the race of a person.” Our Constitution, he said, recognises the distinction between race and caste, which are separately mentioned as prohibited grounds of discrimination.

In stark contrast to the Indian governmental position was the Nepal government’s candour on the same issue, confronted as it is with recent assertions of Nepali Dalits who account for not less than 15 per cent of the total population. The government of the only Hindu kingdom in the world openly admitted that caste is the source of acute discrimination and segregation within Nepal. This, it held, was a serious issue that falls under the theme of the forthcoming conference and should, therefore, form part of the official deliberations at the WCAR at Durban.

Apart from the Indian government, several academics, individuals and groups have also voiced serious concern over what, in their perception, is a Dalit move to link caste to race. This, according to them, is a dangerous move that would lead to a revival of the theory of race that resulted in “Hitler’s disastrous racial policies” and that was discounted decades ago (anthropologist Andre Beteille in The Hindu, March 12). 

According to Beteille, “interested parties within and outside the UN would like to bring caste discrimination in general and the practice of untouchability in particular within the purview of racial discrimination… The practice of untouchability is indeed reprehensible and must be condemned by one and all; but that does not mean that we must begin to regard it as a form of racial discrimination. The Scheduled Castes of India taken together are no more a race than are the Brahmins taken together. Every social group cannot be regarded as a race simply because we want to protect it against prejudice and discrimination… We cannot throw out the concept of race by the front door when it is misused for asserting social superiority and bring it again through the back door to misuse it in the cause of the oppressed. The metaphor of race is a dangerous weapon whether it is used for asserting white supremacy or making demands on the basis of disadvantaged groups.”(Emphasis added). 

There are two substantive issues involved here. One is the theoretical rejection and support for Dalit demands by not just academics but other groups and individuals, movements and formations on the lines that Beteille argues. The other is the resistance to any attempt to take the issue of caste–based discrimination to a global forum; to solicit international condemnation of caste–based discriminatory practices and support for the struggle against it.

Put together, both amount to attempts to distort and thereby contain efforts by the Dalit movement to seek international focus and attention on caste based discrimination, legitimised for centuries through scripture and followed in practice by notions of high and low, superior and inferior, pure an impure. Even half a century after independence, the problem continues. The Dalit condition, which was the result of such a pernicious theory, is the result of a pernicious understanding of race by perpetrators of this condition and not the other way around. It is not the metaphor of race that is being invoked but the metaphor of racism, which was the outcome of the misplaced metaphor of race.

The re–emergence of a vibrant and vocal Dalit movement (after the Dalit Panther movement of the seventies) in the mid-eighties and early nineties has formed the backbone of the national campaign whose demands are now being heard. The systematic campaigns (see box), documentation and theorisation that have emerged reflect the painful reality of 160 million Indians (not counting Dalits of other religious denominations) even 54 years after political independence and democracy.

Even the dictionary meaning of the word racism, (Shorter Oxford: racism is the belief in or adherence to, by the perpetrators not the victims — advocacy of the theory that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities qualities etc specific to their race distinguishing as inferior or superior to another race or races; prejudice, discrimination or antagonism based on this),  needs to hark to the theory of race to describe it’s consequences — the condition of racism described as antagonistic or prejudicial or discriminatory. Moreover, within political science and sociology circles, racism has come to typify and describe systems of inequality and discrimination.  

The condition of 20 million Dalits more than fulfils the description of the conditions used to describe racism. The term is now being invoked to show how the same kind of dehumanising prerequisites (in terms of definition) that are used to  describe, understand and protest against racism are more than fulfilled (thousand times over) when we speak of untouchability and caste–based discrimination. 

Is it not time that we fill and feed such terminology with our own histories and thereby deepen their meanings?

To argue that caste-based discrimination — through exclusion, dehumanisation, segregation, violent atrocities and practices — is a distinct form of racism is surely not out of a desire to dangerously re-introduce, as Beteille seems to argue, the theory of race. Rather, the intention is to emphasise that despite the ostensible world wide rejection of the theory of race, even today, a fifth of the population in South Asia has to endure bitter prejudice, segregation, exclusion and discrimination legitimised by a tradition of superior and inferior, pure and impure. (In any case, the supposed rejection of the theory of race is obviously restricted to limited circles, as even today neo-Nazi squads in the West are a grim pointer to the awesome gap between theory and lived experience. )

The very theory of the atishudra — that even now,  in the twenty- first century excludes an entire segment of men, women and children out of the Hindu caste fold, but controls this section through an elaborate system of exploitation, economic, social and political — is a theory of superior and the mleccha, the pure and the impure. The millions so exploited are used for backbreaking manual and menial tasks. Worst of all, they are even excluded from discourse, from the mind’s eye. 

To state that caste, descent and occupation-based discrimination is a distinct form of racism is to evocatively highlight the depth and details of the sub–human conditions that a fifth of the population of India is forced to endure — through segregation, exclusion and discrimination, hierarchy and domination. 
It is to racism, and not the theory of race, that the Dalit movement as a whole seeks to link it’s condition and demand world understanding, international condemnation and, yes, support. There may be individual voices within the movement who hark back to the issue of Dalits being a race but for the moment, at least, the overwhelming Dalit position goes beyond it. (Incidentally, theorists associated with the movement intimately, especially Thorat of the JNU, are emphatic in pointing to Dr BR Ambedkar’s own rebuttal of the Brahmanical theory of race that justifies the exclusion and brutalisation of the atishudra.) 

The Dalit campaign urges all people, political parties, civil liberties groups, human rights organisations, to address not the whys of caste but address it’s present day existence, manifestation and reality. What continues to motivate us as a people and a civilisation to segregate so brutally 20 per cent of our people and prevents us from lending support to their struggle?

Elected representatives across party formulations — RPI, Congress(I), CPI and the CPI(M) — have allied with the ongoing struggle for international condemnation of continued caste-based discrimination and exclusion. At the preparatory conference in New Delhi between March 1–4, former prime minister, Inder Kumar Gujral, former chairperson of the National Commission for Women, Mohini Giri, CPI MP D Raja, RPI MP, Ramdas Athavale, Congress MP, Praveen Rashtrapal, CPI(M) MP, Arindam Sen, all declared allegiance to the move for international solidarity.

Yet, in the wider section of the political class, the intelligentsia, academia, progressive groups and organisations, there has been a distinct tendency to stay aloof from the issue at hand. The general fragmentation of social movements could be one of the reasons for the exclusion of the Dalit issue and its specific demands from other struggles and also the misunderstanding of the thrust and focus of the Dalit campaign. But the distance and divide is also reminiscent of what happened 50–70 years ago, when the voices of Ambedkar and Periyar were drowned in the lead-up to the national struggle against colonialism, for freedom against foreign yoke. 

Then as now, Ambedkar’s stance was deliberately misconstrued and ignored by the dominant discourse. Ambedkar had to bear the burden of being labelled a traitor simply because of his plea that the rights of Dalits, the ‘untouchables’, should be made a pre-condition for independence from the British. His own lived experience, of having to endure the humiliation of being treated as ‘impure’ even after his education at Columbia University, pushed him towards the demand for separate electorates. Today, an honest look at not just the plight of Dalits (see box) but also the exclusion of the Dalit issue from other struggles is a stinging reminder of the possible validity of Ambedkar’s position.

The questions raised by Ambedkar decades ago are relevant even now. They are questions about prejudicial and discriminatory methods of production and social relations, methods and relations based on principles of exclusion, denial and humiliation that have existed within the Indian sub-continent for 3,000 years before the British arrived. These centuries’ old practices continue to result not only in the creation of wealth and security for half of the population at the cost of the rest, but also in the distinct dehumanisation of a fifth. This state of affairs, sanctified by religious scriptures and practised in the name of caste, is not very different even today.

Why did the national movement not lend support to Dalit concerns? Was it an internal discomfort, a discomfort in dealing with and facing the reality and shame of caste, that reduced us to denigrate and label Ambedkar then and what impels us to resist the demands and support the Dalit movement now? 
In the face of growing articulations from the Dalit movement,and demands putbefore the forthcoming WCAR, serious introspection is required over our resistance to the Dalit move to list the shame of caste, in facts and figures and to seek international solidarity and support. Our response is especially strange considering that in non–governmental circles especially, international solidarity on issues of social concern — for example, the iniquitous new economic regime under GATT, displaced persons by big dams, discriminatory labour laws, gender issues, peace and de–nuclearisation — is accepted practice. Why then is there such resistance to the idea of caste indignities being highlighted internationally? 

The significance of the forthcoming conference should not be underrated.  The abolition of apartheid in 1991 did not, of course, immediately result in the transformation of South Africa into an egalitarian society with an equitable distribution of resources. But the discrediting and abolition of such a discriminatory system within South Africa was largely due to international pressure and support.

The world has seen, before and since, a variety of exclusions, xenophobias and intolerances that have resulted in the genocide of different sections of the people. The plight of Bosnia and the Bosnian people in the very heart of Europe is an example. It will be interesting to see where and how that issue gets representation, if at all. The orchestrated  genocide of the Iraqi and Afghani people suffering exclusion, death and poverty as a result of the unjust UN–imposed sanctions ought to find some space in the deliberations if at all the WCAR is intended as an event meant to convey a serious commitment to the issues under deliberation. Caste–based discrimination goes back thousands of years and it is time it receives world condemnation.

And what of the other sharp and very real intolerances that have emerged in South Asia and even Southeast Asia? Can we honestly look at South Asia in the context of the theme of the Global Conference and not reflect on or highlight the intolerances that have so sharply surfaced in the name of religion?
The crude destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas recently cloaks what the terror of the Taliban means to it’s own people especially women. In India we have been witness to the insidious movement of the Hindu rightwing, which in the name of Hindutva is manipulating the individual faith of millions to legitimise a religion–based nationalism and destroy democracy. Strife and sectarian violence within Pakistan are testimony to the failure of religion–based nationalism. Bangladesh that fought a secular liberation struggle for independence from Pakistani Punjabi domination is today grappling with it’s own demons in the garb of Islamic fanatics. Farther east, for the past three years Indonesia has been torn apart as ethno–religious strife (between Muslims and Christians) poses a serious threat to the polity.

Can we from South Asia really speak at the ‘World Conference Against Racism, Racial Intolerance, Xenophobia and Related Intolerances’ without any mention of the intolerances and xenophobia being created in our part of the world in the name of faith? 
 

Archived from Communalism Combat, April 2001 Year 8  No. 68, Cover Story 1
 

The post Hidden apartheid appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Broken people appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The campaign was launched by Dalit Ezhumalai, minister for health and family welfare on December 9, 1998; three days later, a delegation met President KR Narayanan with the documents that detailed the focus of the campaign. 

Support was assured to the campaign from the then leader of the Opposition, Sharad Pawar and Ram Vilas Paswan (union minister for communications). 

On December 13, and 14, 1998 an NCDHR delegation consisting of PL Mimroth (national convenor), Rajini Tilak, Attam Singh Bhatti and MP Chaudhary met Prime Minister AB Vajpayee, Lok Sabha speaker Balayogi,  and leader of the Opposition, Sonia Gandhi.

A ‘Black Paper’ was released from 15 states and Union Territories on December 8, 1999 in New Delhi; at the release function, Paswan gave the inaugural address and Ramdas Athavale, MP and secretary of the SC/ST Parliament’s Forum, gave the keynote address.

On December 8, 1999 the National Dalit Women’s Conference was held at which 300 delegates countrywide attended. Ms Veena Nayyar, member of the National Commission for SCs/STs gave the keynote address. The outcome was a Dalit women’s charter of demands.

December 9, 1999: Submission of 25 lakh signatures collected from all over the country in support of Dalit human rights.

The cross–party delegation consisted of Paswan, Athavale, Bhandaru Dattatheya, deputy minister for urban development and Bangaru Laxman (both Dalit representatives).

The demand was for the tabling of a White Paper in Parliament and declaration of the next decade as ‘Ambedkar Decade’.

The culmination of one set of the NCDHR’s activities was the National Public Hearing organised at Chennai in April 2000. A representative jury, consisting among others of former judge of the Bombay high court, justice Suresh, former judge, AP high court, justice Punnaiah, former judge, Patna high court, justice Amir Das heard 57 cases from 10 states highlighting 17 major forms of human rights violations. These included untouchability practices, denial of access to  cultivation, grazing and ownership of land, rights of Dalit women, manual scavenging and continued state violence against Dalits. 

Internationally, the Dalit rights campaign has included the formation and activities of International Dalit Solidarity Networks (IDSN), programmes undertaken by international human rights activists, advocacy and lobbying efforts at the UN level and in different countries. 
 

The post Dalit rights are human rights — the campaign appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
— Praveen Rashtrapal, Congress MP

Among Dalit representatives, too, the tendency has been to limit ourselves to issues concerning the white collar Dalit – the issue of reservations – at the cost on issues concerning 70 per cent of us
 
What is the SC / ST MP Forum supposed to do?
It was set up during Mrs Gandhi’s regime when Yogendra Macwana was Union minister. As I said before, it has not been very effective. But we have recently tried to revive it. We have submitted a memorandum to the Prime Minister making significant demands for the rural section of Dalits. These include the demand for land to the landless SCs. We have recently unearthed government figures to show that six crore acres of land in the country is wasteland: cant this land be converted to cultivable land? We have demanded 10 acres each to every SC family.
 
Another important demand relates to monies earmarked by the Planning Commission for the Special Component Plan (SCP) and the Tribal Sub-Plan. These are large allocations made by the Centre to be matched by respective state governments and are specifically earmarked for welfare measures for SCs (under the SCP) and STs (under the TSP). But because of deep-rooted caste bias, they have never been utilized for the purpose intended.
 
Major defaulters have been state governments who simply do not allocate the amount they are obligated to do. For example, under the last plan, Andhra Pradesh was required to allocate Rs. 250 crore to match the Centre’s contribution; it did not. Our demand, therefore, is that the Prime Minister monitors the implementation of the SCP and TSP effectively and in a time-bound manner.
 
Yet another demand relates to the issue of disinvestments by governments in the public sector undertakings (PSUs). This will severely snatch away employment in PSUs guaranteed through reservation to Dalits. Our demand to the government, therefore, is not to disinvest more than 49 per cent of equity so that controlling and decision making powers, including retention to reservation, remain with government. If that is not possible, we have asked for a new central legislation to ensure that all units in the private sector, particularly those that have been turned over to the private sector by disinvestments, are compelled to implement the policy of reservation even after change of ownership. These are only some of the demands.
 
Do you support the Dalit demand that caste-based discrimination be raised at the forthcoming WCAR?
How else will caste discrimination ever be removed? Did apartheid against blacks go until the international community intervened? Besides caste bias here is so deep-rooted; it affects all structures and organisations. Dalit rights are not regarded as human rights at all. Human rights organisations would happily fight for the rights of prisoners but not so easily for the rights of Dalits.
 
Do you know that despite the existence of the POA, 1989, the judiciary has worked in unison to contravene the provisions of that law? Under the Act, there is no provision for bail; yet, in every single case since 1989 all those accused of atrocities under the law are released on bail! Should not the Bar Associations be raising this question? There are also few convictions by judges under this law.

The post ‘Caste discrimination will not go unless the international community speaks up’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.