Saswat Blog

Vande Mataram debate has almost engulfed India these days. I would not claim it to be entirely of no consequence. And those who say that people should be left to sing what they want to, in the tradition of liberal democracy, in my view again, are continuing to enjoy a Hindu privilege. If for a moment, they would imagine how it feels to be member of a minority group being subjected to a song that was targeted against them, most of us would clearly understand the inherent pain. Muslims in India have been told from the beginning that they are citizens of a secular country, and it is the responsibility of the Hindu majority to live upto that expectation. There must not be any confusion in this regard.

Furthermore, some of my beloved readers of this blog have vociferously attacked the communalism in Islam, and in fact to that extent shown solidarity with Bankim Chandra, the poet of Vande Mataram, who also happens to be the founding father of modern Bengali literature.

I am not surprised at the way both perceptions have been intertwined. However, I shall like to dispel some myths about the dismissal of Islam as a communal or fanatical religion, as many in the Hindutva brigade would like to portray it and influence some of us in that process in their abominable quest to establish a “Hindu Rashta”. Some even bring to question the credibility of Mohd. Iqbal who penned down “Sare Jahan se Achha” and compared it with “Vande Mataram”, which I think is a valid comparison, but a grossly non-issue, this time. I will attempt to make some clarifications within the limits of a weblog:

Vande Mataram vs Sare Jahan se Achha:

Let there be no doubt that the origins of the writings and the world-views of the authors are important in understanding the significance of any work. However, even while doing so, one should always keep in mind the socio-political context in which the works have been authored.

I have elaborated on Vande Mataram already in a previous post. The origin of the song was embedded in the work “Ananda Matha” which was just like every other written work of Bankim Chandra, a highly hindu supremacist literature. It clearly outlined Bankim’s aversion towards Muslim people and possibly could have sowed the seed among the Bengali community to later on engage in the religious animosities that eventually led to partition of India into two separate religious regions (East Bengal-Pakistan region and India).

Sensitizing the Bengali population to become reactionary elements in that age was the sole aim of Bankim Chatterjee, and he fairly succeeded in it (which is why the Hindu hymn became so popular to begin with). It can be said without a doubt Bankim was the founding father of reactionary Bengali literature and unfortunately as it is, quite a handful of works during that time thrived with feudal stories and patriarchal protagonists with entire omission of British misrule, (Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay’s stories included) thanks to the unmistakable popularity of this legendary writer.

Speaking of historical context, Bankim Chatterjee lived at a time that was not about “Islam invasion”, that his works were so apprehensive about. It was rather a time when British people had already invaded India. The primary enemies of Indian people were the British colonialists. And yet, Chatterjee was a loyal civil servant of the British administration, and worked as a deputy collector. And he was instrumental in sowing the seeds of two-nation theory through his works full of hatred for Muslims, who he used to describe as “Mlechhas”.

As regards Mohd. Iqbal, who is unfortunately brought to discussion in the context of Bande Mataram controversy, one can only say this. Mohd. Iqbal was a patriot of the highest order whose revolutionary songs were targeted against the British rule only. He had no expressed hatred against Hindus, although looking at growing popularity of Hindutva brigade within the Congress those days, he had sufficient reason to turn skeptical. Muslims, Buddhists and Dalits were among the most oppressed in India, and yet they were the least represented in the high echelons of Congress power. Congress was losing its secular focus with continued tension between Nehru and Patel. Despite Gandhiji’s reluctance, the Patel faction was growing in strength also due to the immense influence the Indian business houses had on sponsoring Gandhi’s visits and shelters at Ashrams. In disillusionment, Netaji Subhas also had to quit Congress. One needs to remember that the hindu fanatics had taken up so much of political space that Netaji Subhash was as unsure as Mohd. Iqbal about the eventual victory of Indians under leadership of mere religious reformers. Netaji was always known for his determined effort to persuade people to give up all their political differences and get united under the banner of Congress. He has emphatically stated that Congress was the only platform that needs support from people all across political spectrum, thus helping to enlist thousands of communists as well as receiving communist support to win the presidentship. However, Netaji was deeply influenced by the Soviet system of governance, its secularism and collective ownerships and he wanted to establish India in similar lines. Except for Nehru, who had himself visited Soviet Union and was a pronounced supporter of Marxist philosophy, Netaji could not gather support from any other major leader, finally leading to his quitting the party and forming an alternative Left organization.

It was during these times that Mohd. Iqbal also went through transformation as he was witnessing how the power structure of Congress was slipping into the hands of Hindu fundamentalists. He used to be a teacher in Philosophy after completing MA from Lahore University. During the college days, his radical poetry to destabilize the British rule with united efforts from Hindus and Muslims were inflammatory enough. At the same time, while on a short visit to London, Iqbal became conscious of the international Islamic revolutions against the European colonial powers, and his alignment towards Islamists became sharper. India was not merely struggling for independence from British during those days, one also needs to remember that some Hindu supremacists within the Congress were making clear their intent to get rid of Urdu as the lingua franca (which it was till that period), and to declare a Hindustan where Muslims would be tokenly represented as was the trend. Hindu leaders like Rajendra Prasad, Radhakrishnan, Sardar Patel were rabidly pursuing Hindu scholarships. And Gandhi himself was trying to adjust to Hinduism demands by “reforming” the religion, not condemning it. Clearly the country was about to be divided, just like Bankim Chatterjee had envisaged, the question was regarding when.

Bankim and Iqbal: Dichotomies

Again unlike Bankim Chatterjee who preached religious violence based on Militant Hinduism, Mohd Iqbal was deeply secular despite being a Muslim. And this is why there were attempts to caste aspersions on his popularity. Iqbal’s poetry were nationally sung and were widely popular (interestingly, it became popular even on the space when Rakesh Sharma made India proud by saying he saw “Sare Jahan Se Achha” from above when asked by Indira Gandhi about what India looked like to him while he was on the Soviet space expedition). Iqbal’s poetry was in Urdu, as opposed to Sanskrit, and that was a great dichotomy already. He was a Muslim revolutionary writing about the poor and the oppressed people of India grounded on realism of political economy. Chatterjee was a Hindu Brahmin reactionary who was writing about glorification of one-nation of Hindu India that was conditional upon annihilation of the Muslims. Whereas Chatterjee was preaching that deaths of Muslims were inevitable for India to be a proud nation, Iqbal was writing:

“Gurbat mein ho agar hum, rehta hai dil watan mein
Samjho wohi humein bhi, dil mein jahna hamara
Majhab nahni sikhata, aapas mein bair rakhna
Hindi hain hum, watan hain Hindustan humara”

(roughly translated it means: We are where our hearts are, and even when we reside abroad, our hearts live in our land. Thus artificial borders cannot separate our patriotic feelings. What of the religions? Our religions do not teach us to create enemies among each other. We are the people from the land of the Hind and shall remain thus despite religions and artificial borders.)

This was the great radical poet Mohd. Iqbal who wrote this “Taraana-e-Watan” among other brilliant works where he always stressed on Hindu-Muslim unity that was needed to overthrow the British rulers.

Sadly, the country was so taken hostage by the Hindu supremacists that they did everything possible to highlight Bankim Chatterjee’s conservative anti-Islam works while they continued to demean Mohd Iqbal. Any serious reader of progressive literature would be able to fathom the length at which Iqbal was subsequently saddened by the way his hopes for a united India was being shattered through the aspirations of the growing Hindu militancy even within the rank and file of the mainstream Congress.

I am reproducing a rare poem of Mohd Iqbal written to his beloved son, where he is asking his child to treat poverty as an asset, and not a weakness. Living the life of the oppressed calls for revolution against the foreign invaders, he declares. He directs his son to recognize that Mother Nature (interesting because its not a similar portrayal like Goddess Durga) has gifted a heart to him that must be used to appreciate the diversity of flowers (his stress on ‘Gul’ is consistently present in most of his poems, including another poem by the name ‘Gul Hai to Gulistan ho’. Also interesting, considering that flowers have universal appeal unlike nation-state names). Iqbal asks his son to dedicate life towards serving the poor and the oppressed in a colonial India and not get disheartened by inherent limitations. “Do not be a sell-out; Make a name amidst poverty!”

“Garibi mein Naam Paida Kar”

Dayare-Ishq mein apna muqaam paida kar
Naya Zamaana naye subh-o-shaam paida kar

Khuda agar dil-e-fitrat-shanaas de tujhko
Sukute-laal-o-gul se kalaam paida kar

Utha na shisha-garane-Firang ke ehsaan
Sifale-hind se mina-o-jaam paida kar

Mein shakhe-taak hnu meri gazal hai mera samar
Mere samar se maya-e-lalafam paida kar

Meri tariq amiri nahni fakiri hain
Khud-i na bech, garibi mein naam paida kar

I could go on quoting from the works of the great poet who did his best to promote religious harmony in the country that was facing threats from fanatic Hindus and insecure Muslims in terms of its future. And bowing down to the pressure of the Hindu revivalism that was to sketch a conditional secular country, Iqbal, like Malcolm X of African-American struggle, turned more towards recognizing the religious mainstream than secular alternatives. When he died in 1937, the entire country mourned the great loss whose expectations could not be lived upto by millions of people of the country who were engaged in falling into the traps of Hindu supremacists’ hatred towards Muslims as well British endorsement of the riots. What’s ironic is that Hindu atrocities those days were only usually tolerated with grief (as Gandhiji famously used to feel ‘sad’ about the conditions in a non-violent manner, which later allowed people like Patel to infiltrate Kashmir with terrorism), and it was continuation of a tradition. What’s often missed in the discourse is that most Muslims actually were converted from Hinduism because of the atrocities and caste-structures of Hinduism. Islam, despite its Shia/Sunni divisions never practiced “untouchability” which was a cornerstone of Hindu religion, and continues to exist even today in practice.

Finally, the categorical difference between Iqbal and Chatterjee was that whereas the former was a die-hard secular who wanted a “Hindustan” based on religious harmony, Chatterjee was a Hindu fanatic and British loyalist who wanted the country to be divided into two parts. Of course Chatterjee won by design since that’s also what the British wanted, and later on towards the late 30’s and early 40’s even the secular people of India had no other option than to accept the two-nation theory, simply because in the other case, there was a clear indication that India would have been ruled by Hindu Brahmins almost to the exclusion of Muslim leaders in power sharing. Even having more Muslim population in India than there is in Pakistan, today, India continues to oppress Muslims when it comes to relegating power.

Those who say that Congress is “appeasing” the minorities are entirely misguided. In fact, Congress, as much as the BJP, has been appeasing the majority in all respects, as a result of which the country’s power equation has fallen in the hands of Hindu Brahmin Supremacists.

Historical evidences, and why the right-wing never quite gets it right?

“Battle of Algiers” is considered to be a landmark in the history of cinema. And its Italian director Gillo Pontecorvo (who co-wrote it with the great Franco Solinas) shot Algeria while the Islamic revolution was defeating French colonialists in the 60’s. His extremely sympathetic treatment of cause of the revolutionaries won him great admiration from the progressive world, whereas the French were quick to ban the film in their country.

Encouraged by the response from the world over, he and his son went ahead to shoot Algeria once again, this time in the 90’s to get the pulse of the country under Islamic rule. Surprised as he was, his videos showed that people just could not tolerate his entry into the country, simply because he was a European filmmaker. However, after knowing that this was the man who had directed “Battle of Algiers”, he was immediately recognized by the new generation of people who greeted him, although with a little pinch of salt.

Seeing the commotion on the streets, a fellow European journalist asked him the reason behind Islam being such a violent religion. Such violent was it, that the Muslims even would not entertain a Marxist filmmaker like Pontecorvo, just because he was a European. Since throughout Pontecorvo was sad while shooting the second film in Algeria (and at some places children were spitting on his car), I was anxious to see how Pontecorvo responds to this stereotyped “European” question.

Pontecorvo, unfazed, replied that Islam was never a violent religion. Indeed its been violent from phase to phase since last 200 years only, and that marks the beginning of European colonization period. It was only in the manner that the European colonizers projected an image of the Muslim people as inherently backward that, they are now facing the wrath of a reaction (which is an ‘open wound’ still). He said he is convinced that the women in Algeria are not oppressed due to their religion, they are oppressed due to economic sanctions imposed by a group of elite colonialists who have made wealth by looting the Muslims during their illegal occupations. As regards the culture, Islamists were not ‘backward’ and the women were not ‘humiliated’. When asked why the women then covered themselves up in such primitive manner, Pontecorvo quoted a female Muslim doctor who said that burka is actually one of the most liberal outfit a woman can wear. It reveals the least and that’s why it makes the woman sexier. The point is to also see the perspectives of the other culture from different levels.

This is also a lesson one can get from the various radical postcolonial studies about how the Islam was never a regressive or oppressive religion in comparison to any other (every religion thrives on codes that are equally repressive). As in the case of India, MJ Akbar, the renowned journalist and author, gives the most comprehensive account about Muslim Rule in his book “Kashmir: Behind the Vale”.

He cites how Saiyyid Bilal Shah (called with love as Bulbul Shah) introduced Islam with love and compassion. That was a time when Kashmir was being ruled by Hindu King Sahadeva. Owing to Bulbul Shah’s immense popularity, there was great support for him, and consequently the King had befriended him in order to carry on the rule. In fact by the time Bulbul Shah passed away in 1327, the king, king’s brother and commander-in-chief of the army were all converted to Islam! The converted king had even constructed Bulbul Langar in Srinagar.

Two things can be noticed here. One, that the King was himself a convert, naturally a voluntary one. And there were many Hindus, predominantly lower castes, but also quite many Kashmiri Pundits themselves, who were horribly disenchanted by Hinduism’s orthodoxy and voluntarily converted themselves. In fact, works by Mulla Ahmed, the first Sheikh-ul-Islam, such as “Fatwa-i-Shihabi”, and “Shihab-i-Saqib” were immensely secular works that held more relevance to Hindus and Muslims than the epic superstitious mythologies of Hinduism.

Upon death of mongol expansionist Kublai Khan (1260-1294), there were huge tribal uprising that led to death of Beijing’s viceroy Lha-Chen-Dugos Grub. Tribes attacked the region Sonamarg valley, which was being ruled by Rama Chandra, who was the prime minister of King Sahadeva. But Sahadeva did not lend much support to Rama Chandra during the period of crisis when tribals attacked the area (in fact Sahadeva was supportive of the tribals). This betrayal led to Rama Chandra declaring himself as the King. As a rather feeble king, Rama Chandra was no match for Lha-Chen’s son Rinchin who attacked the king soon after. Rinchin had escaped the border and aspired to be a king, as much as his friend from Swat valley Shah Mir. Rinchin with support of Mir took over the palace. And Rinchin was declared the Lord of Kasmir on 6 October 1320. Interestingly, Rama Chandra’s daughter Kota who was in love with Rinchin much before the attack, quickly declared herself the queen.

Rinchin’s era is considered to be the golden age in the history of Kashmir, as Rinchin was a Buddhist and he wanted to spread peace throughout the region. He not only married Rama Chandra’s daughter, he also made Rama Chandra’s sons his prime ministers. But since Rinchin was a Buddhist, he could not rule over the state that did not have much Buddhist presence. Hence he decided to convert to Hinduism and called for the head priest. And as shocking as it may sound, the high priests of Hinduism declined to convert him, since they could not determine what caste in the hierarchy was King Rinchin!

Since the Brahmin pundits exercised this folly, Shah Mir found the opportunity to ask his friend to convert to Islam. Although Rinchin was skeptical, he soon saw the great Sufi divine Bulbul Shah at a prayer. Bulbul Shah provided Rinchin what the Brahmins could not: a casteless religion. Islam had no caste: it was built on the equality of humans and faith in the omnipotence of Allah and His last Messenger, the prophet Muhammad. To become a Muslim, Rinchin only had to utter the Qalimah: ‘La-e-laha illallah, Muhammad un-Rasul Allah’.

Rinchin thus became a Muslim, and Islam arrived not through violent coercion, but through peaceful understanding of a harmonious religion. Rinchin took the name Sultan Sadruddin, and built a mosque called Bodro Masjid. During his friend Shah Mir’s rule as Sultan Shamsuddin, a dynasty that lasted for 222 years, Islam had become the paramount religion of Kashmir, but because of its popular success and their identification with the Kashmiri people. Jonaraja described this rule:

“This believer in Allah, calm and active, became the savior of the people and protected the subjects.”

And throughout, despite the brahminical prejudices against the converted kings (Hindus and Budhhists who had turned into Muslims), the Muslim rulers were always sympathetic towards the high priests. It was the period when Nand Rishi or Lal Ded and other religious people flourished. In fact, Abul Fazl wrote in the Ain-i-Akbari:

“The most respected people are the Rishis who, although they do not suffer themselves to be fettered by traditions, are doubtless the true worshippers of God. They do not revile any other sect, nor ask anything of anyone. They plant the roads with fruit trees to provide the traveler with refreshments. They abstain from meat and have no intercourse with the other sex. There are 2000 of these Rishis in Kashmir.”

Moghul rulers likewise, and especially Akbar, were aware of the large Hindu population and worked towards their harmonious living. Firstly, it was the most practical thing to do, since any alternative could have called for doom. Tribal populations were always up in arms against any empire, and it could become a matter of time before Hindus got disenchanted and joined the revolution. To that end, the emperors were forced to be considerate towards diversity of religions. Needless to point out, just as characteristic of any empire (just like it is true in today’s so-called democracies running large thought controls called mainstream media), there were state propaganda working those days to lull people to passivity and relaxation instead of agitated uprising. And just like today’s cheap slavery and draconic hours of call centers, people were forced those days to seek cheap labor in works they had no interests in. But as evidenced, the secularism during the Muslim and Moghul periods were quite practiced at several levels.

“The fusion of Islamic culture with existing Indian culture achieved the most positive expression in the activities of the artisan classes of the towns and amongst the cultivators, as is evident from the socio-religious ideas of the time, and also in primarily artisan activities such as building monuments, the fusion being evident in the architecture of the period. The pattern of living in both these classes came to be interrelated to a far greater degree than amongst the nobility. Domestic ceremonies and rituals such as those connected with birth, marriage, and death became mingled. The converted Muslims were also heirs to long-standing rituals practiced by the Hindus. New ceremonies which had come with Islam, and which were regarded as auspicious, crept into Hindu ritual.”
(page 300, A History of India, Volume One. Romila Thapar.)

Upon deconstruction, what it merely suggests is that Moghul rule created more problems for the upper caste Hindu feudalists than the working peasants. The assimilation was seen more among Muslims and the working poor of India, than between Muslims and the upper caste people.

Now I will quote from Orissamatters, authored by SCP, who is an eminent journalist of Orissa:

“Kalhan’s classic work ‘Rajtarangini’ describes how the Brahmins conspired against Queen Dida as she was not patronizing to Brahminism and after her death, beheaded from behind Sri Tunga, the most powerful protector of the liberal policies of the Late Queen.
So ruthlessly the Brahmins known as Kashmir Pundits imposed their caste supremacy that the people exploited under caste apartheid jumped into Islam which was not vitiated by caste system. They not only became Muslims en masse, but also they became so with so much revengeful resolution that they drove away the Pundits from the soil.
The entire land mass that has now become Pakistan and Bangladesh was the dwelling place of Indians where our ancient people had established their own civilization. It is the Brahmins’ supremacist mentality that has helped Islam to spread in India.
So whosoever has embraced the Muslim religion in this Sub-Continent is an Indian who has revolted against Brahminism, against Brahminic caste apartheid.”

Eminent historian Irfan Habib says that Moghul rulers had even appointed Brahmins as administrators owing to their upper caste/class/knowledge backgrounds. And even in such positions, the Brahmins under the Moghul rule, did not amend their behavior. As an example, we shall take the case of ‘Satnamis’, a sect founded in 1657 by a native of Narnaul, who proclaimed himself to be of the tradition of the great monotheist Kabir, the weaver. They were opposed tooth and nail by the banyas and Brahmin caste people, since Satnamis (worshipper of the True Name or God) comprised people from sections such as sweepers, carpenters and tanners. “It was obviously owing to this contamination from contact with the untouchables that the sect became particularly hateful in the eyes of the orthodox,” says Habib. (Essays in Indian History, Tulika, New Delhi, 1995).
Isardas Mehta in “Futuhat-i ‘Alamgiri” quotes a loyal Hindu official of the Mughal government describing Satnamis as:

“That community, because of its extreme dirtiness, is rendered foul, filthy and impure. Thus in their religion they do not differentiate between Hindus and Muslims. They eat porks and other disgusting things. If a dog has eaten from their bowl, they do not abstain from eating from it or show any revulsion.”

Thus, even during the Mughal period, the Hindu supremacists continued to hold sway, even in the face of definitive secular reigns by Akbar and Aurangzeb. Unfortunately, they continue to do so even to this date—to the extent that the stories of forced labor were exaggerated by the Hindu revisionists, without a mention of exploitation of workers to build temples. More than the Hindu kings, it was the Moghul rulers who played their part in promoting economic parity. Indeed Sir Walter Lawrence’s works show how in Moghul periods, women were given six annas a day for independent sustenance. And in projects involving large-scale labor, the main gates were written with inscriptions such as these:
“Na kardeh hech kas beggar anja
Tamame yaftand az makhzanash zar”.
(No one, it proclaims proudly, was shanghaied into beggar, or forced labor, for this imperial project; each worker was paid fully for his her labor.”)

This blog cannot go on in the direction of glorifying the Moghul rulers. Indeed far from it, this stands to condemn any of the rules by the kings and emperors, since none of them established peoples’ democracy. Also because of the stages of development those days, such dreams were quite distant. But in view of the current attack on Islam and an ignorant dismissal of it as a religion inherently violent, oppressive or backward, I thought it would serve well to do a small analysis of the situation using a critical historiography.

In Conclusion:
The day of patriotic exhibition of India has passed us by. We can rejoice at its passage. To begin with 2006 is not the centenary of Vande Mataram. It was used this way solely for sensational purpose. In addition, even singing of National Anthem Jana Gana Mana is not compulsory and should not be. Hence Vande Mataram controversy was furthered solely for the political purpose. Lastly, Islam is unlike Hinduism. Just the way Hindu preachers know that Hinduism is an organically developed national religion that has always stayed inside India due to its exclusionary philosophy that forbids people from joining it (just like Puri Pandas are absolutely right in not allowing non-Hindus to enter Jagannath Temple since they know Hinduism quite well to be discriminatory), Muslims know it well that Islam is a global religion that is based upon spreading the word of the last Messenger of Allah, and hence it does not recognize a nation-state to be paramount. So certain religious people condemning certain other religious people because they think their base of religion is valid while other bases of other religions are not, amounts to mere assertion of misconception.

And the way the right wing brigade took advantage of death of Pramod Mahajan and statue of Bal Thackrey’s wife to cause unrest in the country, they are now trying to take advantage of a song-recital drama. News reports say that their Vande Mataram demonstrations are causing violence in muslim areas where the hindu fanatics are having a free hand in harassing the minorities in India. And this is simply intolerable and unacceptable, and every patriotic Indian must rise up against the narrow minded ignorant bigots of the rightist parties and stop them from further claiming that they represent us in any manner whatsoever. Its time for them to either gain newer knowledge and get rid of their professed idiocy, or prepare to face the wrath of the oppressed in coming times when the people of India will no more merely vote them out of power like a dying party of losers, but also wipe them off the public platforms where they stage hypocritical melodramas.

In a large-scale human tragedy today, a series of bomb blasts in Mumbai has taken lives of more than 150 people. However, these blasts are no aberrations for the financial capital of India. Mumbai—a city governed by Hindu right-wing fanatics of India—has faced such calamities several times in the recent past.

What’s unique about the blasts in the western India –Gujarat and Maharashtra—is their etiology. Invariably all the blasts have been religious in nature, targeted to create heightened communal tension in the region. And today was no different.

So, if communal violences have such a pattern of occurrence and regularity in frequency, how is it that the administrations turn conveniently indifferent towards their recurrence? Who are benefited in the process?

The usual suspects:
“Terrorists” is one-word explanation given as being the perpetrators for every systematic violence these days. Of course, this word has gained coinage and credibility through the usage by the ruling class. What is important to note here is that the more one uses this word, the more one tends to align with the interests of the ruling class.

A violation to the law and order necessarily is handiwork of the people who desire instability. Without going into the logistics regarding needs of instability (which could be desirable for various reasons too), one can assume that the ruling power draws sympathy wave from people by projecting an ‘external’ element to be cause of innocent peoples’ deaths. Interestingly, the structural instability actually happens only with killing of the politicians, whereas their structural “stability” takes place when innocent lives are lost!

Of course, it usually happens during the days when the ruling powers are apparently most unstable themselves. By every account, any war in the world is also caused at times of uncertainty for the ruling powers. Think of any cold war interventions by the US (spread of communism was the factor), or later on Clinton in Yugoslovia (Monica Lewinsky) or Bush in Iraq (September 11 orchestration). Or take for account, India’s own trysts with regional instability resulting in massive operations in Assam, Punjab, and Kashmir.

More often than not, these take shape of communal violence (just as every war has been fought by religious fanatics). In India, bomb blasts in Maharashtra or genocide in Gujarat are cases of Hindu fanatics attacking Muslim minorities in the name of their own misplaced insecurities.

Misplaced Insecurities:
In the past, the allegations by Hindu Mafia of India against the Muslims were based on myths such as: “Muslim population is increasing in rapid pace to overtake Hindu majority”, “Muslims of India are Pakistani loyalists, and since Pakistan is an enemy state, Muslims must be declared so too” etc. Practicing neo-nazi tactics of training Hindu youths to take up violent means to eliminate Muslims from India, the Hindu militant groups have traditionally enjoyed quite a presence. From propagandizing religions in school education (Saraswati Vidya Mandir) to promote Hindu businesses (Swadeshi Jagran Manch), the right-wingers of India have stopped at nothing in overcoming their insecurities.

Clearly all these insecurities of Hindus fundamentalists have led to loss in lives and property of Muslims (Gujarati Muslims are usually attacked more, because of their prosperous business) and fellow Hindus (who clearly in majority reject these fanatics except for once when they elected BJP to a considerable tenure). But of course, these tactics are carried out most surreptitiously, and at times with blatant disregard to actual circumstances.

Why Mumbai? Why now?
In continuance with this power ploy, the recent tragedies in Mumbai started since last three days.

First, someone defaced the statue of one woman in Mumbai. But this woman was not BR Ambedkar or for that matter, Mahatma Gandhi. Because in Mumbai, and elsewhere in India, on a regular basis, statues of these two giants of Indian freedom struggle are subjected to desecration.

Ironically, this woman was way more powerful. As the late wife of the Hindu supremacist Bal Thackeray, the figure in statue commanded respect. Hence all political parties instead of looking into maintaining law and order of the state so that no publicly installed statues are defaced, and the ‘actual’ culprits are caught, they came forward to apologize for the shameful incident.

The sainiks, allegedly representing the majority religion of India, decided to react in their traditional manner: in a purely Hindu supremacist way. So none less that the executive president of the party (whose mother’s statue this was) decided to take law into his own hands. He declared proudly: “If derogatory cartoons appearing in a newspaper in far-off Denmark can have repercussions in India, this incident is bound to provoke reactions from Shiv Sainiks.”

What a shame!

First off, no one knows who defaced the statue. In all possibility, it might have been a handiwork by the right wing plotters themselves. The desecration took place in wee hours of early morning. The police in Mumbai say the incident took place when there was no activity on the street. In other words, it was not an organized effort by motivated party. To further incite tensions, an empty tourist bus from Gujarat was burnt down in front of the Hindu bosses’ office. It was also found out that this could have been a result of short-circuit, and not done by any motivated party.

Mumbai Joint Commissioner (Police) Arup Patnaik said, “Video footage suggests that the flames started inside, so we are also probing whether it could have been caused by a short circuit. Our priority is to quell the disturbances and maintain order.” The police said they had no leads on the incident that sparked off the day’s disturbances.

So basically, there was no reason to suspect that any Muslim groups or “terrorists” or Pakistan might have been behind such incidents. On the contrary, going by the way, the statue was chosen (to rouse sentiments), the bus came from Gujarat (Hindu violent prone state) and the location (Shiv Sena office), one could investigate the hands of the Sainiks in these events.

But, even as the state police clearly said they had absolutely “no lead”, the leader of the fanatic party declared a war. Throughout the state, widespread violence was let loose. Thackeray, after visiting the spot, told reporters that there was likely to be “ramifications”.
The dark humor
When the majority religions take stock of the situation, the communal racism just takes over. Because of the sheer majority of people that lead the war, they confidently go on attacking like mad dogs. Such rampage has been going in India since decades now.

Just three days back when on July 9, Thackeray warned the country that severe reactions from Shiv Sainks was inevitable, one was apprehending the attacks. Unfortunately it turned out to be even more serious. Closely on the heels of the attacks in Kashmir, where American interests lie, the attack in Mumbai has been planned in premeditated fashion so as to draw international condemnation: against Islam.

To appease American obsession with anti-Islam movements throughout the world, the Indian group of loyal foot soldiers have indeed given fuel to the fire. There was no international coverage of the violence let loose by Shiv Sainiks which had paralyzed the city of Mumbai since last three days. And to draw further attention, innocent lives had to be sacrificed.

This is an old political trick that has always helped Indian communal leaders. When the government at center has been doing absolutely nothing to agitate Pakistan into a war, the war mongering Hindu fundamentalists had no better excuse than looking towards Kashmir and Mumbai.

What needs to be done?
First and foremost, none of the persons on that local train deserved to die this way. Enemies could be well within the same people who are staging a drama of violent protests. There must be through investigations to that effect. Not biased investigations. The Indian intelligence sources need to be smarter than they are now.

Corporate leaflets pretending to be newspapers, like Times of India have already created headlines regarding the perpetrators even before the investigations have begun! One report already says, “LeT, SIMI hand in Mumbai blasts”. Highest form of irresponsible journalism can only result in such news stories. The report without naming any sources, says in the first paragraph itself that the “terror attack on Mumbai trains was carried out by Lashkar-e-Toiba and local Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) activists and was designed to trigger communal conflagration in the country’s financial capital.”

And in the body, it says, “While still waiting for clues to emerge, top intelligence sources in New Delhi seem pretty sure the blasts on the trains were plotted by Lashkar modules which are increasingly collaborating with activists of SIMI, which boasts of strong pockets of influence across Maharashtra.”

For such serious violence that causes hundreds of valuable lives, the press, the government and the so-called intelligence sources are highly irresponsible, and criminal in their misconducts. Times of India owes a public apology for displaying such highest form of carelessness. It’s entirely lost on me as to how someone can be “pretty sure” of the blasts while “waiting for clues to emerge”! As in the past, this time also, the official propaganda machine of India might prove successful and they may even go and nab some people with Muslim surnames (a recent popular Bollywood cinema “Khakee” (2004) dealt with this tragic issue).

History revisited?
In the past, everytime there have been communal violences in India, the administrations have found easy scapegoats in a) Pakistan, b) Pakistani-funded terrorists. Alas, they have never provided any evidence to support these claims. (while on the contrary, independent findings by filmmakers and judicial bodies have always found the homegrown communal parties to be the root causes). These blame-games are perfectly orchestrated tricks by the Government of India to maintain its supremacy in the subcontinent. And in the process the communal politicians have never cared to think of the lives lost.

At times, facts of life are too obvious to be missed. One of them tells me about the complete absence of deaths of lives of the politicians who are ‘protesting’ the most. It’s always usually the innocent commoners who lay down their lives. The people who are responsible for maintaining law and order (the politicians themselves) fail to own up to their responsibilities (barring perhaps Lal Bahadur Shastri in case of a rail accident). They never seem to resign from their powerful positions for not having been able to provide their people any sense of security. On the contrary, while adamantly glued to their seats of power (or of opposition power in the parliaments), they keep blaming some or the other external factors, so that in times like this, they can scare enough people to get united for their own sake.

This time, it should be enough.
Well, this time….
No more reasons to call mayhem
Not one more life in your name
Not another death to uphold your religion
No more such violent catch 22 situation
Not to secure your mother’s dormant statues
Nor to pay back for your father’s power abuse
No more thought controls by government bureaucrats
Not once more will we believe in your tactics of attacks
No time to agitate, its time to step down from power
No press conferences, no indomitable statues or tower
In such times, politicians of the world must unite
You have everything to lose, including your might
For once, walk with the people, feel their agonies
Set examples of selves, write accords for peace
Stop the blame-games with Pakistan and Muslims
Or against one’s poor, the backward, and their miseries
Now is the time to act, to promise just one thing:
Stop playing communal, ‘tis just one life for rejoicing.
(Saswat Pattanayak, Peoples’ Poet, 2006)

Finally, the fraud is over. The conmen have been caught on camera. Two teams sans any genuine emotions of either tears or laughter came together to celebrate the end of month-long television opera that promised them millions of dollars for putting up several Acts and Scenes that would have put Shakespearian drama to shame.

If there ever was a match-fixing ever caught on camera so boldly, it was the World Cup Soccer 2006. The final match between France and Italy just basked in it. Amidst the earlier charges of match-fixing scandals that the Italian team has been caught with, this was the only logical result the world would have seen. It’s a dirty white fascist trick that the Europeans exhibited with charm and carried on with élan. Yet again.

A pathetically mediocre player by the name of Zinedine Zidane who has been hogging media highlights since many years now proved his mettle in this tournament as well. Not just by playing horrendous, but also highly prepared, as certain to make Italy (not France) win!

As a player who performs good only on penalty shots (possibly also because of misuse of his position) he knew that Italy was supposed to win this final. Perhaps he was told, and perhaps he was part of this act all along. After all, tomorrow was going to be a day when the world would have watched one after the other card fall in the recent history of soccer match-fixing scandal, since the day after the world up (July 10) was about to discuss the charges, that involved top football clubs of the world. Resultantly, in a Hansie Cronje (South African White Cricket Team Captain) act, Zidane committed a career suicide deliberately just when his penalty skills would have led to opening of Pandora’s Mafia Box the day after.

And just before he headbutted Marco Materazzi in the chest, he made sure that the best French player in its history, Thierry Henry was sent away from the field. The only players in French team who were genuinely giving their best shots have been incidentally black players. The only ones who made every attempt to make France lose in this championship were the only non-black players in the team: one, the goalkeeper Fabien Barthez who was so easily a loser that the Italian bullshitters at penalty were not even looking at the net while kicking the ball—they were certain that their French accomplish was anyway going to miss the ball. Remember this guy was with Olympique Marseille club and faced match fixing charges in 2000. The second non-black was the French immigrant to Argentina-back-to-France David Trezeguet. This guy obviously knew what he was doing. The racist French crowd which tolerated slurs against Henry was the people who always favored Trezeguet over Henry all along. And third, their crown prince, the so-called “master-of-the-game” Zidane who knew well that Henry was absolutely the best one in the game against Italy and could spring a surprise during overtime. And so the best football player of the tournament was asked to leave long before the game was over.

After that little nasty white trick to make sure that Italy wins the world cup and saves the faces of frauds, Zidane knew the world believed him to be the best penalty shootout player. This image had helped him emerge as one of the richest skippers (Zidane was signed by Real Madrid for a world record €73m). But now if he had to continue in the game and score the penalty, he could be out of the deal.

So what was at stake?
If France would have won, professional soccer would have lost. By professional, I mean the profiteering industry of corporate sponsorships that insures legs and runs campaigns in the name of football. By professional, I mean a racist sports hierarchy that prevents Asians and Africans to play in the best possible circumstances, or even allow them to be fair competitors. By professional, I mean a game that celebrates match-fixing, racist slurs, anti-black monkey chants as part of sports ethics. This neo-nazi professional sports is headquartered in Europe, and currently being bossed by Italian merchants who fix the referees, and the rules. The players are betted upon, and the clubs are pitted against aggressively. After the Germans admitted of match fixing last year and the Italian top clubs were caught on telephonic communication of fixing matches this year, the world was awaiting decisions. The decisions would have affected majority of Italian players and countless other players whose names would have been disclosed in the process. It would have all exposed the mafia involvement in soccer. And that’s not what FIFA is supposed to stand for. So the only way it could have been averted was through the victory of Italy. This is the only way to ensure that people celebrate Italian team than deride it or accuse it any more. And the Italian prosecutors who have asked the clubs to face courts tomorrow would be forced to lose face.

Zidane: World Champion! The Golden Boy of Italy

Trzeguet (right): The Chosen One

Barthez: Future of Football

The mafia swim and sink together. As usual, they decided they will swim together this time.

And France lost. What an irony. After some of the magnificent performance by the team (all except three, are formidable black players who have not erred for once), the team’s captain, without any provocation and certainly not any compulsion, and obviously not while the ball was being chased, turned back on a walking Italian player and went and hit him on his chest. Deliberately so that he would be declared out. So that he would not have to shoot penalty kick.

This is ridiculous. Such things are not done even by school kids. Not done in a village tournament in eastern India. Certainly never imagined to be done by the captain of a fabulous team in the world cup final match!

Aftermath of World Cup Shame!
A few white men again have conned the world by practicing downright racism, unfair game tactics and scandalous match-fixings. Strict action must be taken against Zidane for violating the basic spirits of the game: respect for the audience. None of us must be taken for a ride for a month in the name of euphoria if the matches were all along been fixed. Since it has proven to have happened now, Zidane must face the music. He knew he was retiring rich, and he messed up with his career. But the gains that he has amassed by making certain that Italy win this world cup are things he has to be made responsible for.

One knew Italy is one of the worst playing teams that has ever reached the final of a world cup. But the dirty match-fixers as they are (with 13 out of 23 players in tainted clubs), now they have even bought the French captain in the world cup final. But amidst all media created enthusiasm, people should remember that its no Hobson’s choice for soccer audience. The choice is clear. The “qualified teams” in this mess called World Cup must be banned from playing professional football until the rules of the game are changed to become more inclusive and less monopolistic; and the Italian team (and their frontrunner friend Zidane) are thoroughly investigated on grounds for match-fixings.

4th of July was celebrated as Italian Victory day here with red, white and green all around in big honking cars, loaded with obscene shouting fans. NYPD police watched in silence by the road sides as long chain of cars went on breaking all possible traffic rules one after the other. Some people on the sidewalks might have cursed them for forgetting the 4th of July as an American day. Yet most anyway thought they were more Europeans that day than European-Americans. So the whistling continued; the sloganeering and even blocking the streets.

One would guess it was celebration time. But somehow deep inside, I was terrified by the look of it. What would have happened if as many Asians people would have blocked the road like this and shouted ‘Dil Dil Pakistan” for its Cricket match victory over India? Or blacks of America would have protested by blocking roads for one reason or the other, among so many? Would they not have been all locked up for traffic violations? Or for criminal misconduct? I am sure either of these would have been the fate. But for thousands of unruly Italians or pseudo-Italians on the rampage, not even their licenses were checked that day! Heads popping out of the windows of vans, most standing atop roofless trucks. Groups of people ecstatic to the point of sheer madness. After hours of honking and endless noises, I don’t know when the fans must have retreated. White Power?

To me, it seemed as cheap and as outlandish as the whole drama of Football world cup. Like most games today, Football in the age of globalization has become just another get-rich game involving criminal frauds, and outright racism. These need to be visited for serious appraisal, lest we all merely end up chanting yet another corporate theme song for football hooligans.

The famed frauds:
The Italian football federation prosecutor has finally called for the relegation of Italian clubs AC Milan, Juventus, Lazio and Fiorentina for their involvement in the match-fixing scandal.

This is the country that has now gone to the finals, possibly to win! Hosting all major football clubs in the world, Italy sits pretty at the Mafia position of world soccer. The only difference is this time, even bigger crimes are being conducted. Prosecutor Stefano Palazzi has already charged a total of 30 “subjects” for a range of illegalities. Thirty? Yes.

It started in May this year when Juventus general manager Luciano Moggi was heard telling referees chief Pierluigi Pairetto over phone about which match officials he wanted assigned to certain games! Yeah it stinks as bad as this. And the worst?

Thirteen of Italy’s 23-man World Cup squad play for the four clubs that are under scrutiny. That’s more than half of Italian world cup team! So now we know how they won? Well, let’s ask the Germans. No better than their Italian frauds, earlier last year, German referee Robert Hoyzer had already admitted to match-fixing charges.

So one fixes the win, and the other fixes the loss. And the audience worldover are thrilled to television reality shows on the stadium!

In shame, Italian football federation (FIGC) president Franco Carraro and vice-president Innocenzo Mazzini had already resigned in May because they along with Juventus chairman Antonio Giraudo, are among those under formal investigation. And only last week, on June 23rd, Italian football league president Adriano Galliani, the vice president of AC Milan, has finally tendered his resignation.

In a conversation in May this year, with Italian sport journalist Giancarlo Galavotti, BBC Sport had interesting findings. Galavotti compared Italian soccer regime with Fascism, and said “People would not admit to being fascist, but they were concealing or pretending that they never were, switching sides with alarming ease. There are plenty who are saying that nothing has been proven and nobody has been indicted of anything yet. But the gut feeling among the vast majority of Italians is that this is scandal the likes of which there hasn’t been before, at least in European football.”

Fascists? Oh yeah, you realize when you hear their slogans in uptown New York. But what does the Italian coach think?

Following the 2-0 triumph over the hosts, Italian coach Marcello Lippi said the match fixing scandal had actually helped bring the team together! “Certainly, initially, all the confusion that came out two or three months ago created a desire and a determination to respond and show that Italian football is effective, real and strong on a technical and moral level. It helped to create a tight group.” said Lippi. The critical question here is if technical and moral level ever lacked in the team back then?

Not only committing frauds, but also justifying them comes easy to Lippi. Why the trial of the conmen have been scheduled to be held only after the world cup final is over: they do not want to upset the playing team while the tournament is on. But it is also not a very bad guess to presume that the accused will be let go scot-free once Italy wins the fixed world cup too. If Italians can behave in a foreign land like insane hooligans on the loose, one can imagine how the final results will have them, resulting in complete chaos around the judgments! Amidst all apprehensions, what should not escape our attention at this point or future is that match fixings (referee assignments!) are being done by club managers who own half of Italian playing team squad… Someone has to take responsibility? How about first finishing investigations and then only let the millionaires play with each other, if anyone is still left?

The Racists:
In some specific games, while clearing the football fields after the euphoria, one finds banana skins and peanuts all over. Why? Because some or at least one player in the teams were black. Monkey noises are all the time reported in European stadium among audience to deride the black people as monkeys who need bananas and peanuts.

These cheering crowds are the mainstay of professional football. They bring in the moolah, they sport the jerseys, they bring in the rallies and pamper the players with corporate sponsors by making them popular. The quid pro quo relations between racist audience and their role models have promoted football to emerge as not only the largest played game in human history, but also the most racist.

Only recently, Cameroonian FC Barcelona star Samuel Eto’o almost walked off the pitch after being showered by “fans” with monkey chants and peanuts. Last November, Messina’s Marc Zoro picked up the ball and threatened a walk out if racist chants continued from Inter Milan fans.

In November 2002 monkey chants were hurled at Manchester United’s Dwight Yorke by Sunderland fans during their Worthington Cup tie at the Stadium of Light. In the same month, Leicester City’s British-born Turkish star Muzzy Izzet was loudly booed by Leeds United fans each time he touched the ball during their Premier League clash. In September that year, fans watching England’s friendly match against France in Paris racially abused Andy Cole and chanted “I’d rather be a Paki than a Turk”.

Few selected recent racist incidents that Football Unites, Racism Divides mentions include how in 2004, Ron Atkinson resigned from his job with ITV after being heard on television describing Chelsea’s Marcel Desailly as “what is known in some schools as a f*****g lazy, thick n****r”.

These are continuance of shameful legacies. A decade ago, in the wake of Deptford Fire where 13 black youths were burnt to death, a chant in soccer stadium that could be heard at Millwall was: “We all agree, Niggers burn better than petrol”.

Similar chants used by national soccer teams include:
“Stand by the Union Jack
Send those niggers back
If you’re white, you’re alright
If you’re black, send ‘em back”

Although racist chanting is considered unlawful only since the 1991 Football (Offences) Act, the law is actually a big loophole. Chanting is merely defined as the “repeated uttering of any words or sounds in concert with one or more others”. Hence, an individual shouting racist abuse can only be charged under the 1986 Public Order Act for using “obscene and foul language at football grounds”.

More creative racist slurs have also helped in letting the crowd overcome legal boundaries. In 1994, Holland audience were chanting
“Get back on your jam jar
Get back on your jam jar
La,la,la,la, La,la,la,la.”

New Age Racism-The Neo-Nazis:
Since last two years, scores of neo-nazi tactics have been displayed with audacities that would put human beings to shame. Not to these fans! Four British fans were fined and banned from matches for 4 and 5 years for racially abusing Birmingham’s Dwight Yorke. Emile Heskey and Andy Cole were racially abused by Slovakia fans. Black players were racially abused by Macedonia fans. Motherwell’s Steven Hammel was prosecuted for racist insults towards St Johnstone’s Mohammed Sylla. Asian referee Gurnam Singh successfully sued the FA for racial discrimination. FA was fined £70,000 for pitch invasion and racist abuse by England fans at Euro 2004 qualifier v Turkey.

Last August, ten men were jailed for upto 18 months for conducting violent attack on a Portuguese-run pub after England’s defeat to Portugal in Euro 2004 on 24th June. They were part of a mob which shouted racial abuse and hurled missiles smashing 37 windows at the pub in Thetford, Norfolk, leaving eight people injured and staff and customers forced to barricade themselves inside. Last November, Anderlecht’s Nenad Jestrovic was sent off for racially abusing Liverpool’s Momo Sissoko in a Champions League match at Anfield.

This year itself, Peterborough manager Mark Wright was suspended, and then sacked, for gross misconduct after a dispute stemming from the alleged racial abuse of defender Sean St Leger. He had resigned as manager of Oxford United after being fined and given a 4-match ban by the FA for making allegedly racist remarks at black referee Joe Ross.

In March this year, 39 people were charged following disorder and racist chanting at an FA Cup tie in Stoke between Stoke City and Birmingham City in February.
Kick it Out says fans, ethnic minority communities and players are still racially abused, particularly at the grassroots level where racist abuse is common in amateur football on our parks at the weekend.

What now:
Nothing has changed over last few months either. In fact, the inaugural edition of the Streetfootballworld festival has kicked off in Berlin. But the teams of Nigeria and Ghana have been refused entry visa!
The Streetfootballworld festival 06 is an official element of the Artistic and cultural program to the 2006 FIFA World Cup and is funded under FIFA’s Football for Hope-Program and the German Federal Ministry for Youth. Basically, even in July 2006, the European conglomerates are practicing widespread racism.

The silver lining is that there have been few campaigns to end racism in football. But they have come a cropper since institutional support obviously leans towards the cash rich sponsors, who do not give two hoots. The Campaign for Racial Equality (CRE), the Football Supporters Association (FSA) and the Professional Footballers Association (PFA) have all launched initiatives to try and rid football grounds of racism and encourage more people from ethnic minorities to attend matches.

Chairman of Kick It Out, Herman Ouseley has opined that more black players should rise up and protest, now that they are at a better league at least as members of national teams. “Why do you think the incident with Spanish fans happened at Bernabeu last month? Was it because of Aragones’ earlier comment about Thierry Henry [being ‘a Black s**t’]? Or why now?
The Black players of Arsenal should have insisted that they would not play in Europe till they got a full apology to Henry from Aragones and until the Spanish FA reprimanded him. Black players in national sides (in England and France) and in the Premier League are in a very strong position now to say that there is no way this kind of racism can continue, that they won’t take it any more.” If not many, at least Ronaldhino has come out speaking against current racism in the game, and that could be a saving grace for a world cup that is witnessing duels between racist giants.

French: The other finalists
Just as Italy is infamous for its fraudulent acts by any means, its contender France is a cruel joke indeed. All the while highlighting Zidane as its star and skipper, France would actually not have been in the finals if not for its black stars!

This is important to understand especially given the recent official apathy that French have taken towards French black youths that caused widespread protests last year.

Check this BBC report for example. In the entire story, there is not much mention of the player who actually made the victory goal. Only at the last paragraph the reporter writes “Goalscorer Henry”, not even attributing him with his full name Thierry Henry. By contrast, Zidane is very respectfully written about, his photograph splashed and he is called the man of the match. He is quoted in the headline! He is written about in the intro.

Yes it’s the same Thierry whom the Spanish players derided as black s**t. And the French never made a condition that unless the Spanish apologize they would not play their team. As for Henry, he is actually the brightest of all French players. With his fifth world cup goal he is ranked joint second with Michael Platini on the all time scorers list for France. And in the present world cup, out of total 7 goals scored by France so far, Henry has scored the highest: 3. One of the greatest living footballers in the world, he was also the top scorer in 1998 World Cup which France had bagged.

And yet it’s Zidane who takes the cup. Why? At times answers are really simple. There is no need to beat around the bush here.

A look at French team would show why there was not much jubilation when it entered the Finals. But then that’s a story for another day. It’s a story of granting favor, making laws, prohibiting opportunities, and minting big money. Which is why one feels tempted to ask one last race-based question for the world’s largest played game: Where are the players from world’s largest continent? Asia?

Once you hear the details of victory, it is hard to distinguish it from a defeat.—Jean-Paul Sartre

I apologize for the delay in posting this entry, but I guess I had to wait till the mainstream media no more confused readers with the “hot topic” any longer. I had to wait until after they would have well done away with the headlines and sensations and the matter were allowed to be relegated to backburner. And I realize now is such a time when suddenly the matter of “Reservation” is not being brought about any longer. Its no more being contextualized, as yet again a socio-economic defeat on part of the lower class struggle of India.

However, I will begin with the comment of a long standing reader of this blog. In my last post, Friend Sanjay has kindly posted a comment worth introspecting over. I will do it here.

While thanking him for his continuous critical appraisals for posts here, let it be stated that despite staunch opposition to some of his views, I have always held them with utmost respect. Many a times I have felt like some views that are reactionary to the point of resulting in further ambiguity in progressive views must be discouraged. But truthfully, I have never “censored” a single view so far.

There are certain difficulties in indulging in intellectual discourses when one relates to the self. While walking down the less taken roads, one always feels tempted to stop by more often, and ask the critical questions, “Could I have been wrong throughout the trip? How come the journey is so lonesome? Is it because this road is not going to provide any solution? Am I merely dreaming that things would take place, whereas in reality the road that most people have already taken is the one which is fulfilling dreams every passing moment? People are making records, breaking records, appearing on prime time shows, winning applauds, gold medals and Hollywood breaks. And I am here philosophizing against the notion of success and dream of a society sans “individual successes”. But then how is it logical to state that “their” dreams are any inferior to my own? Am I the sole custodian of notion of what constitutes “societal good”? Where do I intersect, accept, and carry on, because if the struggle is for all, at least majority needs to approve me at some point.”

I am not indifferent towards these series of questions which challenge the roots of my thoughts, opinions, views, and actions. I have known all the while, that in fact, views that are opposing one’s own are the only views that have any intrinsic values worth cherishing. Only through opposing tooth and nail most existing views, have I learnt anything in life. And now why the resistance to be opposed, when it comes to my own worldviews?

Sanjay provides the answer already: He says, “As you are not part of the society which is opposing reservation, I too refuse to belong to a society which develops selective amnesia in attributing traits.” It merely implies that in the nature and process of forming views, we choose sides. At times we are flexible in the face of new facts to change our views. At times we are not. Personally for me, I have changed many of my views (on God, on Salman Khan or on Indian Cricket team) several times in life basing on newer facts or facets. I am sure all of us do the same too.

Then is the struggle to impose (or you may say, influence) views a struggle to win non-members into one’s side? For a professional politician it is a desirable thing to do (hence I have problems with people who think ‘vote bank politics’ is a bad thing. I mean that’s the whole point of politics in a democracy). But for those, including myself, who do not aspire to be political candidates, what sort of struggle would that be? A struggle, which Sanjay refuses to be with me in?

This is a struggle to ‘understand’ opposing viewpoints. Now the word ‘understanding’ is more complex than it looks like. We need to give time to, contextualize, empathize, agree with reason, disagree with justification—all of these and more, in order to merely understand someone or someone’s views.

On a public forum like this, the purpose is just this: to understand each other and each other’s views depending on where we come from.

Sanjay’s concerns are obviously genuine. Are reservations going to be the solution?

A right-wing political solution?

The answer is, I do not know. But the only alternative which nays the reservations has at least proven that it would mean further systematic marginalization of the dispossessed. When reservation proposal was being discussed, I was not exulted either. I knew for certain that it is a move to pacify, not to agitate. It was a step to bow down to reactionaries, not to give vent to the oppressed. It was actually so reactionary a step that all we found out after the bill being tabled was an unforeseen unity among the upper castes, a unanimous media support to their causes, a never-before-seen coverage of their strikes, and most importantly an organized efforts by the opportunistic elites in such an organized fashion, that it must have put the neo-nazis to shame. Reservations debates, if at all helped the elites to recognize each others’ needs all the more and made them get united so much that right wing parties gaped. What BJP could never achieve in terms of uniting the upper castes (since half of them did not want any of Advani yatras anyway), the Congress at the center had achieved: notwithstanding their party affiliations, in fact notwithstanding their political standpoints or lack thereof, irrespective of the states they came from (not Gujarat or UP, but entire India, South and the North, East and the West), upper caste peoples showed solidarity with each other that must have prided the supremacists. Clearly BJP is going to win the next poll. Thank the communists for that this time!

(Racists of India, Unite?)

Whose Identity?

It is important to understand that the contemporary history of India is not that of a struggle for Individual rights or liberty. It is struggle for group rights. This is a slightly different scenario than ever in the past. The group identity struggle that the SC/ST/OBCs are going through is because of their conferred identity. They are being discriminated against, not because they are merely poor, not because they are merely uneducated, not merely because they overwhelmingly reside in states of India which are sidelined, BUT because of their caste status. It’s an identity struggle. It’s going on not just in India today, but all over the world. Indigenous people are fighting to reclaim their lands. To reclaim their lost dignity. There is a heartening gesture here, though. The demand to ‘reclaim’ is a demand that should have been logically bloody. Simply because their loss of land at the first place was done at the cost of bloody dominations of oppressors. But unlike the oppressor classes, the indigenous people are not predisposed to violence (else they would win hands down any day in organizing efforts at dethroning the minority upper castes). Secondly, they have proved to be more law-abiding than the oppressor classes themselves. Let me elucidate.

Its only natural for the society ruled by oppressor class, to already frame certain laws to rule out any bloody struggle as ‘illegal’ because the ‘evolution’ of the oppressor classes have metamorphosed into a consensual class. Consequently, this society to garner its position of power, takes onto itself the mammoth sense of generosity to either ‘grant’ or ‘dispel’ the need to let its prisoners-0f-wars a chance to compete with itself. When it finds, as in areas of agriculture that the lower class people cannot stake claim to superiority in face of industrial society, it makes no issues. When it finds, as in areas of primary education or adult education, where the lower class can learn how to get empowered, (but in reality are never so…its like knowing how to draw rockets does not land one in the moon…one needs to be part of a multi-billion dollar industry for that actualization), there is no problem either. Only when the matter is evaluated at par with elite positions (medical or physical science as education or administrator and priest as profession), that there seems to be unwavering difficulties.

All’s well that ends well?

Reservation will never be the solution. But it is a definite challenge to the status quo thought process of taking the majority of people for granted. And that is why it’s important to revisit the issue of reservation. At the core of it, some of my friends are absolutely right about the upper-caste students. Sure, they do not think like the politicians. They do not think in terms of castes. Students in the classroom today do not consider any group as untouchables. Quite accurate in some cities of India.

But the grim reality is that it breeds something more dangerous. At least where untouchability is practiced, there is a caste consciousness that translates into class struggles or similar identity struggles. As we know from experience that opposite of love is not hate, but indifference; what happens among the highbrows is that they profess a caste-blindness that’s so indifferent to caste issues that it glorifies the oppressor class as the egalitarian tolerant group!

While practicing the caste-blindness, the issue of historical oppression is bid goodbye. Essentially whole generations of students are going to graduate (and their children in future) from schools and colleges without an iota of knowledge in field of caste struggles in India (except those who are interested in studying Sociology or History as subjects—that too if the Saffronites don’t take over NCERT). Rest of the students are not going to be studying the unique tribal history, the unique Dravidian struggle, the unique struggles of the OBCs, who are at times depicted as part of the Dalitbahujans. The struggle that is not religious, but caste-based. A history where people still do not think they are Hindus, only that they think they are Kurumaas, and Chakaali in the South India or Bhandari, and Goudaa in East India.

Caste-denial: In whose interest?

Although Hindus would love to include all these peoples as belonging to the most “ancient” religion, and although the Brahmins and upper caste people do not go around talking about their castes, there is need for a complex understanding here. Upper caste people of India need to realize that the caste-structure had been shaped by the upper castes themselves for “their” own convenience. And hence they take it quite for granted without having to feel burdened by the weight of caste on them. By actually not talking about their castes, they absolve themselves of their well-deserved “guilt”. For the Dalitbahujans, however, it’s quite a different type of struggle. This struggle for caste assertion is one of an identity, not one that they can take for granted. This is one that’s not going to make them live easily. It’s a painful daily reminder, and they have no other course except to assert their snatched rights. The surnames are their characters. They have to live upto them, and yet surpass them. It’s not a privilege, but a burden. Like a wealthy person taking money for granted, the upper caste people carry their surnames without having to think about it twice. But like a poor person valuing the small thatched cottage, the lower caste people even will look at universal wind as enemy to their rooftops.

In India or elsewhere, there needs to be more studies of caste and race, precisely because the oppressor classes have almost taken it for granted. In America, Critical Whiteness Studies need to take place more vigorously to make most white students realize the invisible burden they have imposed on the people of color by means of color discrimination. In India, the Critical Brahmin Studies need to be institutionalized for the upper caste people to understand complexities of caste and socio-economic well being that are influenced by their stoic silences, if not outright display of prejudices. Minority studies are fine to “understand” a differential culture (Asian-American Studies, or Black Cultural Studies), but what we need also is the Brahmin Studies or White Studies, just to “teach” the history of their oppressive culture.

Currently to the powerful White males of the world, there is just a big fuss about need for affirmative action or of assertion of rights of colored people, because according to them, most of the issues have been resolved, now that “marginalized” people have attained “success” already in many spheres. Likewise the Brahmins or upper castes of India think there is no need for reservation because so many Dalit and OBC people are becoming successful. They cite the incidents of chief ministers, sportspersons and plain rich men among “lower castes” who have rode the ladder as examples to justify doing away with any proactive reservation policy.

What, then, is the picture? Have these traditionally marginalized people not attained success enough so as not to need any more reservation or affirmative policies in place? The mainstream answer is yes. Alternative cries are no. What’s the deal?

Part II

The anti-reservation lobby cites success of lower caste people as examples to denounce reservations. If the progress is being done anyway, what is the need of further reservation? The initial period when lower caste people should have been given a chance, has passed already. So there should be no more extension of such scope, let alone any proliferation of further reservations. Such run few arguments on the right.

On the left front, some even justify reservation as means to attain more success just as a form of ripple effect. Some arguments favor reservations because it will alone let the lower caste people to become successful in life, because the competition is indeed tough otherwise. We must build more access to the people with disabilities, after all.

Although I would still support the Left mainstream argument, I tend to think both core arguments primarily are dealing with the same question. And once the question is pre-determined, we are not going to find a radical solution to that. After all, as Audre Lorde had so rightly said, “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.”

I think the question needs to be reassessed entirely. The alternative question I pose about this whole issue (and thereby my peripheral arguments) is about the concept of “Success” itself. As we know already, success in capitalistic society is not just determined, or competed for, but also ‘defined’ by owners of means of production. This is because Capitalism is that phase of human history which aims to suit the least number of people. Prior to capitalism, there were phases of history, possibly more draconic: that of kings and slaveowners and feudal lords. But there were constant competitions, and rivalry among them. Some kind of ‘balance of power’ was always being maintained. There was no clear cut class division on a world scale. The working class and the ruling class were ill-defined.

But with Capitalism, arrived Monopoly. Only a few hundreds of people in the entire world ruled over the rest of us. They own not just wealth, but also own the yardstick to value the wealth. They not just own the knowledge economy, they also own the yardstick to value what passes on as knowledge. They don’t just own managers, they own the philosophy behind creating managers. Not just doctors, but also the rationale behind entrance tests to medical profession.

Capitalism, unlike every other previous stages of human societal development established the yardsticks, which we shall call here as Standards. Earlier there were hundreds of Emperors. With Capitalism, it had to be just one! Earlier there were hundreds of kingdoms. With Capitalism, it was reduced to just a G-7. Earlier there were skilled people respected in every corner of the world. With Capitalism, they began to be respected only in certain professions at certain corners while working for certain sectors. Earlier phases of history were horribly bad. Capitalism became merely grotesquely inhuman.

What are the Standards?

Let’s begin with Gods. After all, Capitalism thrives on the belief that God created the universe and made it a standard assumption. The biggest testimony of that can be found on every dollar bill. “In God We Trust” is the single most famous used slogan in everyday exchanges of capitalism. But with thousands of tribal gods, nature gods and no gods, there used to appear quite a competition. And with majority of people either not believing in a single God or believing in their personal Gods, it had invariably become difficult to conquer the lands populated by such unrestricted folks. God needed to be standardized. In name of spiritualism or in name of organized religions, godmen and gods had to be proclaimed on ranks. Consequently what happened were multi-fold. One Christianity spread throughout the globe as it had been hijacked into becoming the religion of the oppressing White man. “Missionaries” were established in most parts of the world to propagate this religion. Based on Biblical myths, a religion which had absolutely no cultural commonality with indigenous peoples (in terms of names of characters or nature of redemption), this soon emerged as the standard religion. Two, basing on it, other oppressive religions (according to geographical peculiarities) also took charge in their lands to standardize beliefs. Hence for example, in India, when it’s about Gods, the standardized Gods stand out everywhere. They are themes for mythological television programs. They are Gods after whom national holidays are observed. They are the designated Gods. Brahma, Vishnu, Laxmi, Parvati, Shiv, Ganesh: these dominant Hindu Gods were used in the process to kill the Other or Lesser Gods. Gods worshipped by lower caste people in India (who the Census includes as Hindus) are entirely different, unwept, unsung and almost condemned by the general society (that make up the law, media, schools and parliament).

Kancha Ilaiah, a Dalitbahujan activist says in his book “Why I am not a Hindu” (Samya, 1996),

“Even a Brahmin family might talk about Pochamma, Maisamma or Ellemma, but not with the same respect as they would about Brahma, Vishnu, Maheswara. For them Pochamma and Maisamma are ‘Sudra’ Goddesses and supposed to be powerful but in bad, negative ways. A Pochamma according to them does not demand the respect that Lakshmi or Saraswathi do, because Lakshmi and Saraswathi are supposed to be ideal wives of ideal husbands, whereas no one knows who Pochamma’s husband is, any more than they can name Maisamma’s husband. This is the reason why no Brahmin or Baniya child bears the name of Pochamma, Maisamma or Ellamma, whereas in our families these are revered names and we name our children after these Goddesses…. It does not strike an average Dalitbahujan consciousness that these Goddesses do not have husbands and hence need not be spoken of derogatorily. This is because there are many widows in our villages who are highly respected whose stature is based on their skills at work and their approach towards fellow human beings…”

After establishing a standard in religion, and the icons representing the ‘legitimate’ religions (the history of Native-American experience should not be lost on us either, where they were on gun points forced to convert to Christianity, in their very own lands), the religious principles themselves are standardized. The hierarchy of families, the sanctity of marriage, the importance on child-bearing might all seem as comfortable as the essence of any religion or God. But just like the religions, these “value systems” help perpetuate the male dominance of women, in which male property ownership becomes the key. Single or divorced women, unwed mothers, and people of alternative sexual orientations are systematically exploited on economic grounds and the laws to that effect are set on the justice walls even to this day. Conservation of traditional hierarchy, male supremacy, Christian ‘family values’ etc continue to dictate the value system.

In such conservation movement, God (or the justices or president’s addresses) becomes pretty much irrefutable. A former president of Harvard (who stepped down recently) University whose tenure saw the reactionary findings on affirmative action, and whose personal understanding of causes behind women’s underrepresentation in Math and Sciences echoed that of many elite professors of India who attribute similar causes behind lower caste peoples’ ‘failure’ in technical field, also found need to conserve the conservative thoughts around the issues. Lawrence H Summers said to his defense, “My point was simply that the field of behavioral genetics had a revolution in the last fifteen years, and the principal thrust of that revolution was the discovery that a large number of things that people thought were due to socialization weren’t, and were in fact due to more intrinsic human nature, and that set of discoveries, it seemed to me, ought to influence the way one thought about other areas where there was a perception of the importance of socialization.”

“Intrinsic human nature”? Summers thinks it was a recent scientific discovery. Perhaps true. But it is so recent because the community of those elite scientists themselves could have been driven by agendas, their research funding agencies more so, and people like Summers for believing in them and citing these studies, even more so. The agenda is simple: to not diversify the field of science and engineering in order for women to come and shake the male hardcore foundation. Similar cases exist exactly in India where upper castes have had problems with lower caste people rising up from shining shoes to claim that given better climate to make up for their social loss, they can challenge the ‘scientists’ off their mindsets.

Capitalism while working on the superstructure of culture, politics and society takes help of first ‘Standardizing’ even before influencing. Standardization helps in dispelling any authoritarian tactics. It works smoothly and creates necessary illusions that are comforting and numbing at the same time.

Hence when the standards of beauty are envisaged, Capitalism dictates the norms of blue-eyes, 36-24-36 vitals, the designer clothes. So much so that the terms it devises to further normalize thought process are “Fashion”, “Model” etc. Model is a term that goes unquestioned. I mean in a way, everyone wants to be a Model to others. Or for that matter no one wants to be “unfashionable”. Standards of ‘good’ and ‘desirable’ are carefully orchestrated, pretty much like the way the term “Black” connotes everything negative (Black days, Black march, Black-out, Blackmail, Dark Age) etc., as opposed to White which denotes ‘fair’ness.

In terms of country, it’s the Western Europe and the US which become the Standards. From Greenwich Mean Time where world begins at London, to the ‘Super Power’ of the US, the notion so pervades minds that they become a standard. It becomes difficult to pursue the US as a country having poverty or illiteracy or exploitation. Hence more often than not, it’s the people who are brought to task for being ill-informed than the system of governance which has somewhat made a mark at keeping people ill-informed.

And this system of governance, the western Democracy model which is infamous for promoting ignorance by emphasizing on monoculture, single language, single god, unitary value system, disproportionately high ownership of things by a single race, religion and gender, a citizen privilege syndrome etc has also been made a standard in governance. Based on ballot box competition, driven by high fund-raising efforts by the old Men networks, so-called democracy rules. to the extent that any country that does not practice western democracy, is offered strange looks and armed intrusions.

Capitalism, which works as the seed for corporate sector to prosper, demands that human labor be mindlessly replaced by machines and turn both against each other. It thrives on breeding alienation, creating divisions among workers by refusing unions any intrinsic power to organize and call off work. It promotes certain brands of education that supports its machinery. Professionals from technical background become the only ones who are needed to run capitalism, since labor force becomes the most dispensable factor. Efficiency becomes the key word and it merely goes unquestioned since it basically means that the bosses need to get most out of the workers by making them work for as less as possible so as to make higher profits. In such a setup, the workers tend to think of the welfare of the company bosses (‘we should work even harder because if the company goes on loss then boss will fire us’). The bosses accordingly do not give any two hoots to workers’ welfare. Because apparently, the workers are less educated and hence they are dispensable. Education becomes a promoter of class society, not an instrument to bridge the access and control gap.

Class society in turn preaches the idol god, but in reality worships only one God, universally seen. The Money God. Success is calculated in terms of money. Achievements in life are translated in terms of recognition by money (after all, what is Nobel Prize, if not a committee of Trust money?), parameters of in-group and out-group status are financially drawn. Money determines who will be in politics, who will hog limelights, who will be on television, who will have luxury to watch television. That’s the reason why Indian reactionaries cite Dalits are successful when they become politicians, or corrupt bureaucrats, because they understand their own language of what constitutes success. Success then means one’s access to money, one’s ability to worship money and one’s capacity to overcome monetary needs. Being rich becomes being successful becomes worthy of being emulated. Being a celebrity, a politician, a TV star. “Hot Happenin n Rockin”.

This entire discourse rests on economic systems of capitalism where capital, not community, becomes paramount to judge standards of society, culture and politics. And that’s why everytime we indulge in “Merit”, and “Success”, and “Achievement”, and “Ability”, we are basically using the words that help the capitalism’s arguments stronger.

For one, let’s change the question. Rather, let’s turn it upside down. And we will see the need to revisit our privileges and celebrate the “failures” as treasures that keep the world from getting reduced to a competitive turf of mindless warfare. And when it comes to give back to them for their great tolerance and display of peaceful silence, Reservation needs to be just a primary offering.

I will call this the Princess Diana Syndrome. Remember that poor adorable princess who met an untimely death? The whole world just seemed to have lost this great soul who was so beautiful and could have changed everyone’s lives by posing alongside the orphans. Media everywhere from global to national to regional to local got hooked onto the image of Diana as the savior who was a victim (even if that meant that she was victim of media themselves!) To some extent the media houses blamed each other, the paparazzis and even the evil cash-rich boyfriend who was also some kind of a prince.

The fairy tale ended with Diana. Or as much I thought.

Until I started following the medical students in India. A country that recently underwent a historic blunder with a nuclear treaty, whose prime minister went on the stage to hail the colonial powers, whose farmers were reportedly committing suicides every passing day off unpaid debts, whose tribal people were being shot at by police brutally for absolutely no legal reason, whose fortunes had been so unevenly distributed that the gap between the rich and the poor had only been doubling periodically if not more, whose healthcare system, education system, and corruption system were all continuing to be elitist in every phase of reincarnations.

Suddenly someone dropped a cup of tea. Reservation bill for the other backward castes. I thought it was teacup indeed because I read from school civics book about the directive principles of state policies in Section IV of Indian constitution. And if I never would have read those books, then also I could have understood the need for such reservations for a country like India. In my recent trip to India this last December I could feel that Bangalore needed some reservations for working class people to stay there, lest the city be taken over by cash-rich tech-savvy tenants. In Hyderabad, I felt like in Charminar area, there needed to be some reservations for the Muslim preachers so that the Hindu temple created alongside the monument does not continue intentionally blowing its bhajans on loudspeakers. In Bhubaneswar, I felt like the Orissa tribals needed some reservations at Kalinga Nagar lest the lands all get to money hungry arms dealers aka government. But hardly I realized that the teacup would become a storm, possibly the worst storm to have hit India in recent times.

I always thought reservations for backward caste people in India are not some proposal or imaginings. It is a necessity. It’s a historical necessity! But instead what I found as I kept flapping emails and newspapers and blog comments were some grounds of objection which were gaining mammoth popularity. I have dealt with many issues, including Merit, elsewhere in this blog. But I will lay out other popular domains here.

1) Is Reservation a Favor?
One, the ground that the backward caste people have made quite some progress, and so they do not need reservation anymore.

Of course this is valid observation to say that they have made quite some progress. But to say that they don’t need reservation any more is to defeat the crux of the observation itself. Precisely because they have made progress, it’s logical to conclude that the reservation policies in India have worked positively in improving the lots of some people who include people that we historically called untouchables. Now the reality though is their improvement has taken place only marginally so far, and is on a constant progression. They are growing in the social ladders, but are yet to attain the power structures. Quite similar to the black people of America where through affirmative actions, many of the minority people rose to stardom, yet we know that not many of them have become influential so far in many elite areas. Even today more than 90% or more of the deans of colleges all over are White. Even today there is only one Senator who is a black. But some progress is being made nevertheless. I have a quicker solution (to which I will allude in a while), but I am also ready to go with the tide!

Likewise in India, the progress in order to continue demands that we increase the reservation quotas even more so that we can see more substantial improvement in the lives of the historically dispossessed. There is also a moral question here, which often goes unnoticed. That answers the question of ‘Why should we care’ types. These people are lower caste, because they were declared so by the ‘higher’ castes. They suffered so that the higher ones would enjoy the privilege. And hence, if not for any other legal and rational reasons (which are aplenty), for this moral reason itself, India needs to resurrect itself and let the lower caste people have greater shares of the cake now on. We owe it to them. To our domestic servants, and to the farmer-slaves. And to those students whose seats we not only refused them to have, but also refused them to dream of having.

2) Who Divides the Society?
Second line of reasoning that I see common to my readers’ resentments is pertaining to the division of society on basis of caste. To this, my answer is one of amazement. Caste politics have always continued to thrive in India. All the while, the lower caste people were subjugated and there was not a sign of remorse and guilt (and no demonstrations by upper castes against their fellow oppressors. When Gandhi offered his token fasts, he was also killed by the Hindu fundamentalists). Even to this day, all classified marriage ads would stress on marriages within castes. Even today domestic slaves are continuing to flock households of higher classes. Division of labor is indeed a casteist prerogative. Medical students who are polishing shoes to demonstrate their anger are clearly suggesting that they consider the work of cobbler as below their dignity! Even to this day! In other words the children of Brahmin caste would not allow their children to become cobblers in India. No matter how poor, the Brahmin families would stress on wearing the sacred thread to distinguish them from lower caste families. These active forms of caste discriminations are being practiced in India for as long as we know. And now only since the structure of Brahminical dominance bastion (the education) is being challenged, the country is noticing havoc. Suddenly politicians are being blamed for caste-based politics now. All along when the politicians themselves practiced Brahminism and the people did so religiously (everytime they invited only the Brahmin priests to solemnize a marriage) then no one questioned the caste divisions of India. Only when there is a valid demand for legitimate share in higher education, there is the hue and cry. Some of the more progressive minds agree that it’s fine to “improve the quality of primary education by granting even 80% seats to backward castes”, but its not OK to have reservations in Higher Education! I mean, the answer to that is, of course there are 80% of people in India who are backward castes anyway. So all of them will be in primary education, which is free and compulsory! It is the lack of resources and access to elite medical school coachings and preparations for them that deprive these 80% people! Hence the need for reservations.

The point is regarding losing the power. The well-meaning friends know it too well that primary schools do not change power equations. Throw them to schools, when their parents will force them to work in fields or have them sold to ragpickers, they will anyway drop-out. Plus they know that there is no chance in hell for the backward castes people to fund their medical preparations or other elite education at all. So it’s easier to give those 80% away to primary education! The ruling class knows the rules of wishful thinkings. Saying let them have primary education is like saying, let the wives do the household works only! When it comes to decision making and when it comes to budgeting money, the Men are there! Young students of India are actually thinking that higher education needs merit, and let the primary education go to the lower castes. The transition and the factors in between, the vertical structure of class society, the money factor, the debt factor, the social mobility factor, the factor of having one surname in place of another—-are completely lost on the blue-eyed youngsters!

3) The Infatuation with Exotic Exceptions:
Third, is the question of the poor Brahmins. The poor Brahmins are aplenty in India. No denying that. But how come again, the minority poor Brahmins are now becoming the issue when the majority poor backward castes never were catered to?!

If total population of Brahmins in India are mere 5% and of them one percent would be actually poor, or comparatively poor with the landless Dalits and Adivasis we need to make policy decisions here. No I do not agree with the alternative proposals of economic parity argument. I am sure that’s not going to work in a simple way. From Vivekananda to Aurobindo, Hindu preachers knew to what extent caste is a socio-economically complex concept. The poor Brahmins are NOT the same as the poor Dalits. Period.

We all know it just too well. When the poor Brahmin begs in India, it’s considered a blessing to serve him/her. When the poor Dalit begs, the person is treated like a cursed cur. Who are we kidding? It’s actually regressive to even equate both categories. To begin with, Brahmins were not supposed to be wealth accumulators. I hardly know many Brahmins who are super rich. As I have stated earlier it’s the Kshyatriyas and Vaisyas who were the rich and powerful. All that the Brahmins had was the monopoly on knowledge, and that to a great extent translated power for them. Because of that so-called ‘knowledge’, the Brahmins have always survived the otherwise economic onslaughts. Using that today, most of them have become Pandits, Vedis, Dwivedis, Trivedis and Chaturvedis! They are the traditional scholars building up the ivory towers of education. They have defined the syllabus where students don’t read history of Dalit plights in independent India. They have demarcated the superiority of engineering and medicine as subjects that only they have ensured as more worthy by creating a demand-supply ratio that increases market pressure for those jobs. The Brahmins have relegated farming as a lowly activity although India is supposed to be an agricultural country. In Brahminical India, the farmers commit suicides and engineers fly first class! They have not just conceptualized their brand of education and forced its validity down on us, they have also created a market for their education (reason why students of literature and art history do not get jobs and find hardly any takers for marriage even for a dowry!), and they have earmarked the status tags.

In that whole process, their monopoly has not got lost on us—and which we see every passing day, the disproportionately high beggars on Indian streets, the prostitutes in cheap brothels and the large unemployed crime-prone youth groups. What it has also done is let a few cracks fall here and there, where there have been some Brahmin victims as well. But the victims in these cases are victimized because of a Brahminical structure itself, not because they are Brahmins. It’s like the White homeless people of America are victim of a White structure that thrives on market capitalism.

The question is where to start the reform process. As I have said earlier, I have quicker ways to address these issues. I guess many are working towards that in Nepal, in Orissa, and in Jharkhand now. But since the governments, that are more interested to guard the Indian Hindu Constitution than to empower the people in reality want a reform process, I think they know the answer now.

Part of the reason why even a rightwing BJP is supporting the Communists in this case (whoa!) is because it understands that the opportunistic Communist members in the UPA do not want radical replacement of the power structure. They want to maintain the ‘sanctity’ of the unity factor which enables the ruling class to rule.

The reason why different nations of India are not yet separate countries is because Nehru passed a bill in early 60’s that made it illegal to cede from the country. Likewise, every ruling coalition guards its interests. That’s the reason why all political parties want this reservation to go on, not as a revolutionary step—but as a conservative step to prevent the alternative.

Is there a Quicker Alternative?

The young inspired idiots who think they are some medical scholars should get the political maturity to understand that there cannot be a better government for them than the current UPA. At least Manmohan Singh can use his so-called leftist pimps to silence the Dalit resentments in India. In the other case, if they fail to do that (and Lord Ram forbid, Advani must be chanting) a massive revolution of the landless against the landlords in India could result not only in abolition of those medical coaching centers, but also in revamping of the healthcare system completely.

Five decades ago, the US thought Cubans were no good other than being sex slaves and sugarcane farmers. Fidel Castro got the support of his revolutionary people to change the country into one of the best healthcare haven known in the world history (even better than the US itself)! It’s because Cuba did not have an elite medical education, nor did it distinguish between people of different jobs. Yes, the media reports have denounced Cuba because the doctors get less pay there than the peons get paid in Indian government offices. But what the heck, doctors in Cuba have demonstrated highest human concerns (even to a Katrina crisis that US could not handle), whereas for all we know, India has one of the worst healthcare systems in the recorded world history that ignore the poor people systematically who cannot pay their fees.

If the medicos do not heed to their politically powerful friends in both ruling and opposition (as if there is a difference between Manmohan Singh and LK Advani!), they will soon be unable to withstand the abolition of elitist structure of higher education. Once higher education will be massified, and will be available for free to all (deservedly so), they can no longer monopolize over the professions and they can no longer demand French wines from Pharmaceutical companies to prescribe illicit drugs! My friends who are Pharma sales representatives have given me rides to clinics of doctors in big cities of India, where they demand for gifts ranging from liquor to flight tickets to call girls! Oh those merit-based established Brahmin doctors of India!

The Taboo Question: Do Doctors deserve the Hype?

With all these talks of merit and education, the medical practitioners in India are impaired by skills. Engineering and medical colleges in India are institutes of big fraudulent activities. Seats are blocked, sold and malpractices in examinations are so rampant that even the college principals have to call off the examinations. Why “Munnabhai MBBS” movie became such approved despite being an unoriginal flick is because people have lost trust on the doctors as a whole. Visit any medical and one finds unattended patients rolling down on the floor for days. Only those who have money or power are lucky enough to procure a bed inside the hospital. People die on the hospital corridors every passing day because doctors simply refuse to look at them. The AIIMS, where one protestor was allegedly killed (another media hype which could turn out to be false) is a place where thousands of critical patients are without beds, where to get a doctor appointment one needs to wait for weeks, and where dozens of people die on daily basis because of inefficient care even before being admitted! The private hospitals like Apollo are so expensive that even Americans would prefer the state hospital of Baltimore county.

India, the country to second largest population in the world is mired by healthcare issues from the beginning. Brahminical stress on female infanticide and the expensive screening of unborn gender are a regular inhuman practice. Historically “merit”-orious doctors have history of neglect that have no known parallels, in terms of sheer magnitude.

The myth of merit being attached to doctors is one which also needs to be shattered. Democratization (proper representation of backward castes which form the majority) and not professionalization (elitism) holds the key if we want any change for the good.

In the meantime, I am saddened to notice that many well-meaning people have actually found their Princess Diana in the medical students’ strikes. It’s glamorous. Pretty faces holding slogans any day get more prominence in media than black-faced coal mine workers. Or the landless tribals who get killed for defending their rights, or even the students who demand reservations because they are discriminated on grounds of merit. After all, just like caste, Merit is also a human construct.

Caste and Merit: Two sides of the same Coin?

What’s interesting is that both caste and merit were devised by the upper class Brahmins. When it suited them to rule over others, they used ‘Caste’ and aided the Kings in exploiting the masses. Those were the days when even the ‘poor’ Brahmins were comfortable being poor, because they gained respect ONLY by renouncing their wealth. People from villages to royal palace would continuously garland them with gifts and foods, and those poor Brahmins would not have to toil on fields and even if they did not own a palace they had unrestricted access to any house they wanted to visit, to rape lower caste virgins or to ‘banish’ lower caste rebels.

When the feudal society was “replaced” by capitalistic one (not entirely though as we learn more) by the same ruling class, the terms changed slightly. The moving money started ruling, instead of the concrete lands. At this juncture also, the ruling class (including the Brahmins) started monopolizing over the money since modern money economy also germinated from Gold (their traditional ownership) than crops (the farmers’ produce, although that also took place in lands owned by the landlords).

But with the revolution of the landless once again to cause imbalance of ruling structure, money found itself in slightly more democratic structure (just as the historic progression of everything else). Here is where some Brahmins and members of other ruling classes fell prey to competition. Before all the palaces and the institutions were about to be conquered by the hitherto landless class, the ruling coalition devised the Class Society.

The sustenance of Class Society:

Class Society in Democratic systems work in a hegemonist way, to facilitate power consolidation in the society on basis of “Knowledge”, another traditional weapon of the ruling class. Here also, the only ones who benefited were the small elites. But when the most accessible ones (the applications or the Arts) could be understood by the majority, the ruling elites raised the bar for the most inaccessible ones –only with the aim to exclude people, not include—(the principles or the Sciences).

At this juncture, the traditionally landless people are now rising up to demand their share in the inaccessible sciences, to stop further gaps between them and the knowledge, not just in terms of economic costs, but also in terms of social costs of understanding. In the past, we have seen how physical sciences were hijacked by the ruling elites also by practice. Indian bomb needed to be called a Hindu Bomb for that reason! The nuclear physics that earmarked the class society helped the traditional Pandits. What has a tribal society got to do with nuclear weapons? Even if it has some constructive uses, why should the traditionally landless village dwellers bother about this when they can live peacefully with their Mother River, without disturbing “geopolitics” of “Indian subcontinent?.

But as the class society progressed in its greed, the divisions became more apparent. The modern landless of India got most affected in the whole process. Bereft of traditional education, and threatened by industrial displacements, the majority of the poor have been organizing at several places of India at several levels. But at the same time, irrespective of the local area developments, and the cooperatives, there has been such an exoticization of the backward caste people that an imagery of them becoming engineers and doctors are inviting wraths from the traditional bastion holders.

Just like the “White Men’s Burdens”, the Brahminical burden to civilize Indian population has expressed itself in bad to worse forums. One comment on a blog read, “How can you let a SC/ST doctor conduct operation”? Its not unfortunate, its actually criminal to think that someone from a lower caste who get, lets say 40 marks less than the higher caste (for various reasons spanning from absence of English heritage, to lack of malpractice, to no proximity with the professor who rather wants to give away his daughter’s hand to a fellow Brahmin aspirant doctor) will become an inferior doctor.

With the current healthcare records of India as an indicator, if nothing else, the candidates getting lower marks (which is anyway improbable) must be allowed to replace the candidates with higher marks. For the practice of medicine is not meant to be proven in its elitism of institution or certificate rankings, but in the everyday dealings with suffering people. Established doctors and enrolled medical students who have clearly demonstrated that they do not feel for the fellow suffering aspirant students, are clearly also sending out a message that they are highly insincere, insensitive and criminal when it comes to dealing with suffering patients. We do not need high-scoring candidates now, all that India needs now is skilled people with human values that champions the causes of the dispossessed. We have the majority of such well meaning people (clearly evident by the way they have been tolerating a minor Hindu supremacist rule in India since decades now) in the country. What we need is to merely train them in the elite fields to make the skills accessible to most people. Since there are a handful of opportunist professionals (like airline pilots) blackmailing the country, Indian people perhaps should request doctors from fellow third world countries for a short duration and in the meantime, fix these irresponsible doctors behind bars, and completely overhaul the current healthcare system, where they must allow no more than 5% of upper caste people to get into the profession (they will be needed for short time, since the indifferent socialites will need some counseling from those so-called doctors who can actually empathize with their midlife crises).

No more Princess Diana tears, please. What we need is addressing of the real issues that affect THE MAJORITY, not the minority. When Bolsheviks came to power they had to overlook the pains caused to beautiful daughters of the royal families. When peasant revolutionaries of India chased the Kings down the streets, they did not spare the innocent children of the palace either. When a revolution takes place or almost takes shape (as in Nepal) one does not have time nor patience to attend the cute royal Dianas’ pleas.

At least 80% to 95% reservations of seats in medical institutes (merely to reflect the proportion of backward caste people), if not outright revolutionary takeover of the medical colleges, is a necessity at this critical juncture. If a small minority of 5% of people could rule over the country through complete control over elite institutions (and promote divisive oppressions), then 80% of people taking over every hospital to take care of their own lot through complete control over elite institutions (to make them mass institutes, and promote majority rule) is definitely going to be a welcome relief in India.

Fellow readers and activists Satya and Rajesh have sent me via an email a response they had, to the issue of reservation, at the UMass., Amherst mailing list “Indian Manifesto”. I simply love everything they have to say here. And especially the way they end the note with:

“One CANNOT reverse the arrow of time. In the last two decades, the lower castes are on the move and have been more influential than ever before, in determining national politics, distribution of power and resources, redefining culture, and the very texture of everyday life. That’s the greatest thing that has happened to India in the recent past. In fact, it is a more significant event in the history of Indian than even the independence struggle.”

Absolutely a must-read!

Fellow reader Open to Discussion asks me some valid questions following my earlier post on the topic . I have decided to publish my answers here as well for more general readership.

OD asks:
1. why so much of poison my dear friend?
2. no where in india were the rulers were brahmins
entire UP and bihar had been ruled by Yadavs(OBC), rajasthan by jats (OBC), in tamil nadu all except Brahmins come under reserved cat, so some body amongst them must be ruler.
3. algebra questions are never asked in medical entrance!!
u set any syllabus, it does not matter, toppers will remain toppers.
for indigenous med, we have separate ayurvedic collages. there is no need to include it in allopathy

I respond:
Dear Open to Discussion:
The reason behind my relatively long posts is that I explore the forest, not stick to trees. If you will read the entire post, it merely says that it’s a wrong thing for elite students to protest against possibility of equal opportunity for students who have been historically denied the privilege, owing to their socio-economic class.

To further this humble opinion, I have cited examples to show how the ruling classes guard their interests and growth by NOT sacrificing their privilege.

I do not wish to influence you into believing one way or the other, but I do not wish to find your words in my mouth either. Hence, my quick responses to your questions:

1. There is no poison. But yes, lots of anger. Because I possess a privileged ‘caste’ background myself, and I would not wish to support such protests being done by people coming from my social locations. Therefore I feel something in me is at stake too. Coming from Orissa, I have witnessed firsthand the violence against the so-called lower-caste and untouchable people. By not denying my privilege, I have understood to what extent I am a part of the oppressive sphere. And by seeing that the cycle is not being allowed to change, again by the ruling classes in Orissa, the Brahmin Bureaucracy and the Patnaik governance, I would be naïve not to see the role of my social class in perpetuating the crisis. For all I know, if I took my resume to a place of work in Orissa, (or anywhere in India), I will not have to feel conscious of my surname and no one will make assumption that by family name, such as, ‘you are good only to mend shoes’. And you know what, I am born with this great privilege. Hence it’s not a poison. Its an understanding of being privileged and expressing resentments when such privilege is mis-utilized, as at the current juncture by some fellow medicos.

2. I do not like to be dragged into this, because I personally think some of the Indian rulers I will name now are my favorites too. However, my point was not to say that Brahmin rulers should not be there, but to say that we must reserve seats for rulers of other caste varieties too (and overwhelmingly so, since they represent a much wider people). However my friend, to refute your supposition, following are few exemplars:

Historically, yes Brahmins were never the rulers. In fact, Hardly ever! But they surely collaborated with the local kings to help the caste division take place according to their sacred texts. We are well aware of the Brahmin sponsored Mauryan coup against the Nandas. Or several such dynasties. Since my post is mostly about current India, we will focus on the here and now (the India which began in 1947).

First, there needs to be a distinction between who are the actual rulers. As you know, there are thousands of people in the power structure but only a few really implement the policies. There are very many different Nations inside India. Only a few govern them through federal laws. I will refer to them here; (note, not all of them are Brahmin supremacists at all…quite the contrary, many are very progressive indeed. But this was beyond the point…since you need the statistics..)

The prime ministers: Nehru, Indira, Rajiv (one family that actually ruled..!), P.V. Narasimha Rao, Morarji Desai and Atal Bihar Vajpayee… (did I leave out any other name…Shastriji?)…Whoa…that’s called real power.
Being the prime minister of India, being able to change national languages, being able to divide Tamil Nadu, being able to annex Tripura, being able to destroy Babri Masjid, being able to cause Bofors ….

Looking at the huge majority of PMs and all the Prime Minister’s Men (ministers, bureaucrats), India has been ruled ALWAYS by the Brahmin caste, if that answers your curiosity. It’s the prime ministers alone who decide over the fate of this country, alongwith their clouts of bureaucrats. Unless you want to include presidents, and we can talk of V.V. Giri, Shankar Dayal Sharma etc.

You bring up the question of Bihar and UP and cite OBC rulers. Clearly OBCs may not be equally disadvantaged. But partly also because they are more than 60% of population in those states. On a closer look, even as they are majority in UP, what do we see? Time after time, “Presidents Rule”. Don’t forget Romesh Bhandari’s weapon to destabilize UP! Or creation of Jharkhand and the perpetual poverty that plagues Bihar, once the most treasured state of India. To even think that Samajwadi Party, Bahujan Samaj Party or Rashtriya Janata Dal have ever ruled the country is a lie. Not even DMK or AIADMK. Although I will come to Tamil Nadu now.
Her Highness Jayalalitha is also a Brahmin. Not just that, she is a loyal ally of the BJP! So when you say “in tamil nadu all except Brahmins come under reserved cat, so some body amongst them must be ruler”, you need do more research.

Kushwant Singh had given a statistical interface to suggest Brahminical hegemony in India long back. Those were the days when the right wing had not even seized India. Now situation is far worse. But here is a pointer to some of his findings:
The Brahmins control over 70% of the top decision-making posts in the political system, administration, judiciary, army, police, press, media and academics (Statistics on composition from 1935 and 1985)
For example, in 1935, during the Anglo-Brahmin Colonial Era, the 5% Brahmin caste group held most of the gazetted positions among Indians in the upper echelons of the administrative machinery. In 1985 one finds that out of 3,300 Indian Administrative Officers (IAS), 2,376 are Brahmins; from the rank of deputy secretaries upwards, out of 500, 310 are Brahmins; of the 26 state chief secretaries, 19 are Brahmins; of the 16 Supreme Court judges, 9 are Brahmins; of 438 district magistrates, 250 are Brahmins; and so on in other circles of power and policy in the Indian state. If we also include the “twice born” Brahmanical castes, mainly comprising the Banias and Kayasths, the combined state power of theirs jumps from 70% to almost 95%.

Now that says clearly something! We can look at all chief secretaries of India and confirm the statistics even in 2006. Lets not forget Romesh Sharma either! These are again instances of not Brahminism so much, as they are instances of an absence of lower castes and tribes in the actual power structure of India.

And what is the percentage of Brahmin population in India? Five %

3. As regards, Algebra in entrance tests, again we miss the point when we look at certain question papers in some states than looking at the entire philosophy. First off, only students who have science backgrounds are usually eligible to sit for these tests. Which essentially demands knowledge of mathematics. And yes, when I said Algebra, it also meant Formulae and Values in Physics, which are integral to the examinations. The point I was making is that many complicated concepts make up for the entrance test, and most are foreign to students of minority community, ESSENTIALLY because they cannot afford a two-year coaching preparation education to know these concepts!

Since a ‘good’ education that can help someone fit into the system’s demands requires Money with a big M, its not so simple to say that “Toppers will be Toppers”. Toppers are those people who have access to the best of resources in their fields of studies and have incentives good enough to motivate them to secure that position. Please take it from me, as I have topped in many exams (state level, university level etc) myself, and I have to feel humbled to say that it was nothing so extraordinary to have achieved what I did, which others with similar environment could not have. Its only a systematic deprivation of sections of society from availing the resources that undernourishes them. Even to get loans for coaching, one needs to have a rich men network, to begin with. Unless we block the desired number of seats for the backward people and coach them for free (while continuing to charge the rich for their kids’ education), we will be only part of the same oppressive ancestors who subjugated the country, territorially, and now as we realize more and more, mentally too.

Regarding Ayurveda, the point of reference was that the respect traditionally attached to Allopathic medicine science is because of the exclusivity and professionalism attached with Medical profession (reason why seats are always limited to begin with). And what I was offering was basic assertion that all of the medicinal practices (Allopathy, Ayurvedic and what we have…) need not gear towards becoming ‘elitist’. Since health is the most common factor for survival, the attitude of practitioners should be to “massify” their skills, not “classify”.

I am open to discussion as well. But more open to an understanding AND empathetic discussion geared towards social justice for people who are most marginal in our society; than towards justice for students who hold banners in their hands to shamelessly protest against equal opportunity (yes social equality needs sacrifice of individual liberty at many junctures). I can understand why the elites need to guard their class interests, but can never support their stands.
Greetings,
Saswat

It should not be surprising to notice that just as the Indian economy is getting liberalized day after day, Indian society is growing regressive quite at the same pace.

As an instance, we allowed private broadcasters to dominate television primetime. Once what used to be an instructional medium for a nascent republic, Doordarshan soon gave way to a television culture that heralded an era of perverse family-centric, monolithic, stereotyped middle-class squabbles. On another instance, India let go of its mission-centric national healthcare focus and allowed doctors to practice in private, for the rich, and to get paid by business trusts. In its latest instance, we allowed private education sphere to dictate the nation’s future, and the publicly funded institutions of learning that once strived to provide equal opportunity to all, soon succumbed to corporate norms of cut-throat competition and insecurity.

It is possibly a combination of all three (and many more such) making a simultaneous movement ahead, that is making sure that the gap between the privileged and the dispossessed is maintained and fostered.

At the same breath, as a consequence, it should not be surprising either to notice the recent demonstrations of the medical students against the proposal for reservation of seats. Not only does this movement sing to the tune of the global media hegemonists who thrive on “individualistic interests” of instant gratifications (by means of a dominating television culture), it also promotes the business sense of private concerns who place money above everything else even in basic needs such as healthcare; and nourishes the merit-myths of an unequal society in order to perpetuate exploitation of historically unprivileged people.

The ongoing medical students’ demonstrations bring out simply the worst, the most disgraceful and most selfish core that can occupy human hearts. It’s not that this is something unique to Indian medical practitioners. Such pathetic stance of elitist bias can exhibit itself on the streets any given day at any place in the world.

But these are the times when rest of the world is slowly waking up to realize the need for “affirmative actions”, and “equal opportunity policies” to not only allow the ruling class an occasion to atone for causing historical injustices to discriminated sections of society, but also to understand that the society would not progress without those whose interests have been sacrificed at its alter. And ironically, these are the times when on the roads of India, privileged students are organizing efforts to prevent historically “forced” backward class of people from joining ranks!

Basically the dichotomy is this. The indigenous, tribals and “backward” castes peoples have been systematically exploited in the land of India since ancient times. Since the days of Aryan Invasion (which is basically an Indo-Iranian phase), a section of elites who formed the ruling class (Kshyatriya) always faced unsuccessful challenges from the people who originally inhabited the vast land from Himalayas to Kanyakumari. Unfortunately, as elsewhere, these indigenous people were never known to be violent or reactionary (a horrendous Tyrant Asoka realized this when he was massacring millions of Oriya tribals in 261 Before Common Era). They had already developed their own models of collective living (so-called ancient civilizations were already in place before “Aryan” invasions, just like America was already a people of inhabited land before Columbus “discovered” it). And for the ruling class invaders that ‘settled’ in India, conquering lands were easy, but to silent the egalitarian mass of tribal people from putting up resistance was the most arduous task. Not that the ruling elites were incapable of winning small wars against the tribal people, but the reality is they needed them to build roads, clean palaces and become sex slaves. (Just as today, the state and central governments of India would much rather do without the tribal people and their naxalite inspirations, but then, who would sweep the floors and clean the kitchen and become domestic slaves of the Babus?)

The elite minorities always need the presence of the larger majority of hapless people. Now not everyone in the elite minority section may be actually ruling. And not everyone from the larger majority may be suffering. But when it comes to guard interests of their respective historical classes, they know who to stick to (barring an extremely few exceptions…and those, we shall leave to Hindi filmmakers for sensationally outlandish cinemas). On a general rule of thumb, the elite minorities to remain guilt-free have chosen two principal methods to rule over: one, to divide people and ruthlessly suppress popular resentments, and two, to create a more inclusive basis for their governance to project themselves as representative of the majority.

One may argue that “divide and rule” has been the most potent weapon in the hands of the ruling class. From Mohandas Gandhi to Malcolm X, great freedom fighters have expressed this several times that some elite White men have always divided the world in order for them to rule. Whereas this is an accurate assessment of colonial history, in my view, there have been greater and far more effective tools of oppression in the hands of the ruling elites. And this one comes from more ancient times and has been lasting to more recent days! This one, I will call, “inclusive rule”.

To demonstrate validity, let’s go back to the days of Aryan/Columbus/White invasions. After discovering that annihilation of indigenous people creates more problems than its worth, and also realizing that the ruling class had lost all moral authority to rule in an ancient world where people were not only egalitarian, but highly spiritual (worshippers of river, sun, earth), the militarist ruling class sought an alternative solution. Why not to create a class of people who would come from within the masses, will possibly stay as the masses themselves, but yet serve the cause of the ruling class by NOT positing a division, but a coalition.

Thus the movement aimed at converting of spiritual into religious began by the ruling militarists who took definitive help of a group of “learned” people who in different religions are called differently (in Hindu India, they were declared the Brahmins). The innately spiritual tribal people were assured that it is in their own good to accept the Brahmins as the higher forms of human beings since they have attained from birth already what masses of people have been striving to attain throughout life. To a society that was unaware and absolutely seeking no God (since it found the Eternal in every element of nature anyway), such a Brahmin striving was named ‘God’. The people of the mountains and rivers were told that they did not know what they sought for, if they did not seek for that one God, who the Brahmins had a way to communicate with.

Simultaneous world history shows similar activities taking place everywhere else. The Americans (I mean, the real original ones) were forcibly converted into Christianity by invading Europeans. Bible was forced down the throats of the indigenous people who hitherto had only worshipped the elements of nature. In every continent, the Aryan/Columbus/White mix in its overtly ambitious project of conquering (count Napoleon to Asoka within this bracket) the world followed this method. NOT of divide and conquer. But of being Inclusive Rulers. From Chanakya to Machiavelli, all political treatise involved diplomatic ways to rule lands, not by causing outright divisions among people.

So, once the society was comprised of different caste structures (or liberal Hindus may say “division-of-labor” structure—as if it helps any bit), the ruling coalitions (of Kshyatriyas and Brahmins….or ….landlords and priests) continued their ruling legacies for centuries hence on, putting forth the simple proposition: “we are the mandated rulers, blessed and permitted by God to create rules of legal living”.

Today, as mandated rulers, the politicians appoint their favored people too. The judges in India still pass judgments from over a table that shows a mythological figurehead from Hindu Epic. Judges in the West still have Biblical inscriptions on the walls of courtrooms (or just outside). The ruling class since those days of brutal conquests have been parroting the same lines of “God Bless Our Land”, “God’s Own Land” etc to position their seats of power as clearly invincible and definitely indestructible. When God, in their projection is the creator, and when God wills their rules, how can their seats be overthrown?

Fortunately, these opportunistic alliances have never succeeded at ruling for long at a stretch. Despite the masterminded intelligence plans of including people in their ruling coalitions, they have only given vent to a dictum created by themselves: Power corrupts. Neither power instrument nor corruption mechanism ever existed in the communitarian ways of living in the beginning (a funny quip I have to invent here: … “In the beginning..there were peoples”!). These were the contributions of these ruling classes. And they kept felling victims to their own trap almost all the time. In name of monarchy, they fought with each other for power. Princes killed their father Emperors for power. Second queen poisoned the food of the King so that her son will fight and win battle with son of the first queen. All kinds of perverse self-centric conquests permeated this culture.

All along, in the historical stages of progress, peoples’ revolutions, although never highlighted, made kingdoms fall, resulted in several wars where people came on the verge of eliminating power addiction among the ruling classes. But using all kinds of manipulative methods to rule was never the prerogative of the oppressed masses. Perhaps in the daily slavery, they did not have time to devise plans. Or perhaps they had grown conditioned into defeatist mindsets (these are the only two reasons why people today don’t fight the militarists either). When the coalition rules did not succeed, and indeed their inability to contain popular resentments caused them to kill each other inside kingdoms, people grew more conscious of their need to eliminate these class structures. Although, deeply uprooted from their rationalist thought processes, and perhaps blinded by religious fervors too, people still have always wanted to punish the ruling class. From Sepoy Mutiny of 19th century to Grandmother Against War of 21st, people have always fantasized about teaching a lesson or two to the ruling class combines. But ask them if they would like to rule then? The answer always invariably been: “Not interested in politics. Thank you!”. I always despised those answers, because they smack of indifference. But ask me, and I will answer very similarly too. Why? Because people refuse to play into the game of the ruling class. It’s not just for Marie Antoinette to say ‘let them have cake’. Its also peoples’ prerogative to say “let them fight and squabble and rule and die”.

Such a people have always existed. In fact, many from these people (and count me in that) accidentally or deliberately, simply do not believe that power games are necessarily a good thing. These people never believed that Kings were doing any good to the society. They provided the backbone for popular resentments and a wish to establish a form of society that existed in the beginning, lacking competition, thriving on cooperation and understanding.

Once the ruling coalition of militarists and priests came to the realization that like them, not everybody is a pig and not everyone wants to get dirty, not everyone cares about their harems and their crowns and their glories, and actually most of them are so fed up with the elite culture of writing history that they would rather revolt and take away their thrones and dump them into obscurity, the ruling class changed its strategies. Of course, the indigenous people along with their other working class counterparts forced the kings to flee. And they refused to work as bonded laborers to landlords, and work as slaves to masters. But of course before things could get really out of control, and more radical elements among the resisters could actually behead all of the ruling class folks (not out of their love for violence…but out of their love for tolerance for a peaceful society which could be established only without lecherous treacherous emperors), the ruling class left the kingdoms and created the parliaments or Houses.

The transition of ruling class from slaveowners to “elected” presidents has been extremely smooth. The transition of Royals to “elected” members of parliament has been equally smooth. The transition of feudal lords to market capitalists has been definitely smooth. The transition of priests and Brahmins to educators and scholars has been exceedingly smooth. The conversations of transitions left out the indigenous and working class peoples entirely! So much so, in fact, the transitions needed to take place without their consent.

The so-called democratic institutions everywhere in the world were founded on the well-laid out plans charted by the ruling class, which changed colors (from White British imperialists to Brown Indian capitalists) but the transfers of powers took place between the parties that agreed upon with each other whereby the dominance cycle would have to continue, with direct or indirect benefits to the ruling elites, only.

So for instance, in India, there was a transfer of power quickly done, just when the British realized that freedom movement among peasant revolutionaries were possible—people who didn’t seek power and were not affiliated to any political parties that would agree to future British terms. They came to this conclusion after several times imprisoning Indian leaders, just to test if Indian people could lead a struggle without these leaders. And spontaneous peasant uprisings everywhere suggested they bloody well could and shall. Before things could turn ugly for the ruling class (landlords, kings of princely states, Indian opportunistic leaders, Hindu fanatics, and British rulers), the (potential) ruling coalition comprising all these aforesaid categories made quick compromises. Everyone’s interests were taken care of. Landlords who had enslaved hundreds of indigenous people were let go without penalty (even their lands remained with themselves, until after Indira Gandhi was pressured by Soviet Bloc to act on these pests). Kings of princely states anyway had left their palaces fearing murders, but they were all provided security and even parliamentary tickets to fight elections. Opportunistic political leaders quickly agreed with any and every terms so that they could also enjoy the seats of power, no matter if it meant division of the country and separated families from each other and caused millions of deaths. Hindu fanatics had a field day in keeping the huge majority of country with them, to the greediest extent that they refused to even let go of a Muslim state of Kashmir. British rulers of course after tea parties and tiresome map drawings, left to a wealthier exploiter Britain most comfortably, without being tried and hung in public even for once in an Indian court for all the millions of lives they had taken (although today, Indian ruling class is very interested in Saddam Hussein’s trial)!

The winners took it all, and loser people stood small. These small people were soon called names in the free India. The dominant argument went that India would progress quickly if the government would not spend money on these low class people. The elite Brahmins who had declared the indigenous and tribal people as ‘Untouchables’ shivered at the idea of allowing them a place in the Indian mainstream. ‘They were good only for the jungles, after all!’ So in every possible fields, attempts were made to keep the ‘backward’ castes (whoever devised that term clearly thought of ‘his’ caste as a ‘forward’..sic! because its not meant in just the economic sense) out of focus. When they could not stop Ambedkar, they projected Nehru. Although Nehru was actually progressive, he was since 1930’s dominated by Ballavbhai Patel in Indian politics. So even as Nehru sat on the throne, Patel ran the show after doing the country a favor by integrating the princely states (whose kings were anyway thrown out by the revolutionary masses) with Union of India. When Communists came to Kerala, they together dismissed its legitimacy. When Dravidian languages raised their heads, they installed a first president of India who was a Hindi fanatic and Hindi-fied the country. The Hindi-Hindu-Hindustan slogan went hand in hand with the ruling combines.

The structure changed, but the coalition never changed. Although the BJP might be cribbing about not tasting power for three decades, it should take heart that greater Hindu representatives were always ruling over India in the garb of Congress. S Radhakrishnan, the first vice president was an authority on why Hinduism was the best religion in the world. Religious, casteist perverts continued the same rampage directly in the ‘free’ India which they used to carry out on behalf of British imperialists in the days of colonial India. The structure had just been changed. Not replaced.

The history of this so-called Independent India is now nearing 60 years. And the original inhabitants of India, the indigenous peoples even to this day are being sacrificed at the alter of ‘development’. Be it the great redundant Dam on Narmada or be it the shining McDonalds at nook and corners, the tribal people have no place in India’s landscape to go to. They are being denied rivers they have worshipped for generations. They are being charged the same taxes (or more) that they paid to the landlords earlier, now in more sophisticated manner. They are being displaced and sent to the city outskirts to live in inhuman slums. Forced to sell their own children in want of food. If their child has a talent, (like Buddhia) its being targeted to be killed. They have no ways and means to compete with the city-dweller upper caste coalitions who know how to order a ‘Maharaja Mac’. They end up becoming rag pickers, sex workers, and domestic slaves.

All this, not because we never did not have policies in place to reserve seats for these oppressed people. In fact, Indian policies for reservations (thanks to the only backward caste guy in the entire constituent assembly—BR Ambedkar) were in place long before the US opted for Affirmative Actions to benefit the Black population at education and workplaces. But the fact remains, the “Inclusive Politics” diplomacy works to put up an illusive front, and whereas it says the law is there, it does not guarantee that it’s implemented. Just as the law is harsh on rapists, but rapists get away anyway. We have reservation policies in place, its just that it does not get implemented.

For instance, let’s begin from the latest scenario. With growing privatization, the law for reservations will not hold good. Private concerns do not give a damn to government regulations (partly explains why they are called private, and not public). Of course, they do encourage workplace diversity and end up recruiting many women candidates. In effect, these candidates are chosen not on basis of caste, but on gender alone. And whereas that’s a good beginning, it’s still like the second wave feminism where white women got equal rights as white men! The backward caste women never stand a chance to get employed in this case. That’s the reason why I have always opposed the Women’s Reservation Bill in Indian Parliament, because it will eventually lead to wives and daughters of royal families ruling the country. It’s another story they are already in such a large population in parliament. The Indian mainstream media acting as their pimp, keep criticizing lower caste Rabri Devi, but puts Her Highness Rajmata Vijayraje Scindia of BJP on Page 3.

Educational institutions are increasingly becoming private, hiring teachers by providing them higher scales and better facilities to groom students. They are interviewing parents before admitting children and finding out if the parents are rich and ‘English’ enough first! (Sic!)

Healthcare industry likewise is hiring doctors and grooming them to be the best, funding their researches, sending them abroad, installs sophisticated machineries, and caters to elite clients alone. Basically the best doctors are today affiliated with private practice, flatly refusing to treat the poor, who need the treatments the most owing to their circumstantial disadvantages and lack of access to other healthy platforms.

Privatization of Indian economy is not an accidental phenomenon. It’s a very well envisaged part of the ruling combine that has historically ruled. The land-grabbing, convent educated, wealthy, upper-caste social bulls and butterflies of India find it extremely convenient to maintain their own class status. To that extent, they are willing to go to any end. They are the ones who created the class society on basis of language (Sanskrit vs Pali or Hindi vs Assamese/Oriya), religion (Hindu vs Islam), caste (Brahmin vs scheduled castes/tribes), education (Engineering/technology vs Humanities), economics (landowners vs landless), geographical location (North vs the rest), employment (bureaucrats vs ragpickers/constables) etc.

And now they want to make sure of few more things in order to secure their seat belts all the better. They have orchestrated an extremely elitist demonstration which is causing havoc in daily lives of millions of people in India. They are blackmailing the entire country to decide once and for all, on the issue of reservations for backward caste people. And with the convenient middle class mentality that they have been able to create now, the decision will soon be against reservations. And that will be yet another victory in their history books. And yet another struggle of the oppressed against the mighty, that will never be taught at classrooms. For the time being, if you need a chapter, draw a leaf from SCP’s simply outstanding analysis about the need of reservations and the criminally redundant positions taken up by the elite students. Click here to read this excellent post.

Reminds to me, if the country had given equal support to the Tribal people who came on the streets to protest against police state’s organized killing of 14 innocent people and the subsequent mutilation of their body parts to evade post-mortem charges at Kalinganagar, we would not have seen these elite medical students on the streets. They should have been by now serving the villages of the same indigenous peoples who need medical assistance, and bloody well deserve it.

These medical professionals are examples of the most ungrateful humans. Before their conscience pricks, they should realize few things: that they are not smart from the womb, that they are being groomed to be doctors, and that a certain number of seats does not mean that that’s the number of people who are talented in the country. They should also not confuse talent for a skill, with merit to qualify for the skill. They should realize that indigenous people have a lot to bring into the medical profession through their crude understanding just as some elites have introduced convoluted Ayurveda as an alternative form or just as someone like a Deepak Chopra introduces Hindu ways to healthy living. The world should know of the elementary nature cures, which can be introduced by people from the rural areas only. For this of course, we must ensure the so-called medical entrance tests to be reconfigured to include questions pertaining to tribal and Other Backward castes’ history and their history of struggles with medical facilities and seek their judgments on how to improve healthcare system in India, and stop asking frivolously complicated European algebra questions…

The police will surely not kill 14 of these students (since they are children of bloodsucking bureaucrats and tax evading businessmen, and because their lives are not worth just fifty thousand rupees like the Orissa Chief Minister estimated as the cost of tribal lives he took away). But the police must put all these disturbing people behind bars and the Supreme Court of India must act immediately to forbid these people from practicing ever in their life as doctors. In my humble opinion, they should start working as janitors on the roadside as they are good to take to streets so often, and for that they need to sit for national entrance tests too. For the rest, who do not qualify, I am sure some of them will ‘attempt’ (and of course never commit) self-immolation acts already enacted by the dramatist par excellence Rajiv Goswami during Mandal issue.

It’s a shameful chapter that the history of India has to go through, and down six generations, children reading history books will know how grossly pathetic Indian civilization actually has been, evaluated from the lens of mainstream culture—a thoroughly racist, casteist, sexist, patriarchal, elitist country based on systematic discrimination, state sponsored fraud, and oppressive regimes. And where the oppressed are killed by police bullets and sympathies go for the reactionary elites.

Vikram Buddhi could be anyone. He could be the mindful mathematician, eloquently solving world riddles. He could be the calculative genius on behalf of pacifist Einstein. He could have been framed as his family is pleading . He could have himself posted the messages as he is admitting.

I see two dimensions to it: one, the action itself (online participation) and two, the ideology, if any (the politics of it).

The question is what are the circumstances that might have led to his erratic and clearly unjustified postings? As an example, in a chatroom, any frequent visitor will notice the oh-so-frequent postings of hate lines all the time. Clueless people on both sides of political spectrum spit venoms at each other, initially beginning with racist comments like “you Indians always smell curry” or nationalist comments like “why do you all land up in my country” to personal assaults like “get the hell out of here, else we’ll bomb you like we do”.

None of the lines above are manufactured. As a researcher in digital media interactions, I frequent public chatrooms to sense the happenings and all the time face such ballistics. Considering my lifetime trysts with misdirected wraths from the conservatives and casteists, Hindu fanatics and average theists in India, I never ‘confront’ or ‘counter’ such irrational and outlandish racist comments. I fully empathize that the atomized people living in secluded apartment houses as individualistic wholes, without any interaction with neighbors, whom they do not know incidentally (since they speak different languages) or intentionally (since many are immigrants); where behaviors from both issues of immigration and language have been made suspect (how many television shows or films are produced to depict normal behavior from foreign language immigrants?), people then turn to online interactions as a good outlet. There, isolated individuals find others in a community. In America, the community that should be existing in the real neighborhoods actually exists in virtual world.

As an oasis in human society, people flock into bulletin boards to at least find people who can ‘talk’ to them, and not merely put up smileys on the roads. The chatrooms and bulletin boards are of course all moderated. And moderated by people who are political beings themselves. Where it’s the machine, there are words which are censored. Of course the words that are censored are themselves a limited list, and that list consists only of some English words that are recognized as offensive to one culture and omits all the hundreds of words that could be otherwise offensive to other cultures. Cultures here mean, not just countries, but also religions, non-religions, sexual orientation, gender issues in foreign countries, and political philosophies etc. Although everyone is allowed free entry into the boards, their freedom is clearly demarcated.

This is what makes the case of online interactions less interesting. A hegemonic set of rules determine what’s called a hate speech. Where ACLU might have got it right and the pro-rule advocates wrong is this fine line. Incidentally today’s world is not one singular nation. With several different cultural codes and the freedom for interaction among all cultures (anyone from Finland can be part of a chatroom of Seattle), that’s been provided by online forums, it’s virtually impossible to deconstruct every insults. And the rules will only help suppress the voices of the minorities whose words and intentions are more susceptible for charges.

Free speech has always worked in favor of those who are free to exercise them. That said, it has also been used to preclude the minority voices. Preclude them on several grounds. And there are several minorities in this country. This case pertains to political diversity.

Clearly, Buddhi is not a liberal or a guy on the left. His views have no consonance with the progressives. No person of any amount of critical thinking skill can even lend support to his words. Basic elementary understanding of the left is that sporadic violence does not lead to any solution. Elected presidents of any country or their party people are truly innocent. The guilty in an electoral democracy where ignorance about general knowledge of cultural history and political geography of the world is rife, are the larger gamut of voters who vote without slightest knowledge of their role in perpetuating an unjust political environment. What Buddhi announced on bulletin board shows either he was provoked into doing so (considering that he had apparently no criminal background), or he was having being completely naïve, stupid, and perhaps idiotic. People may also consider him anything else, and I shall not stand in the way.

However, I have been asked by some friends to take a stand on him. And I shall take one. Clearly I am not in favor of anything that he has said. If his act be considered political, then this is my view. People who want to change the world for the better do the basic minimum homeworks: they need to know a lot of history of all kinds of peoples, they need to organize people on common progressive causes, they need to educate others who could not afford to spend all that time on understanding differences. These steps need not be guided by principles of violence or non-violence. They need to be guided by purposes. And the purpose needs to be for overall betterment of the world, starting with the world’s poorest, the ones who have been historically deprived, the working class and the hungry mass. None of these involve any thoughts around mindless postings of a privileged nutcracker.

All that being said, I could be reading too much into Buddhi’s politics. He may not be a political guy at all. As Mahablog responds to a right-winger, “Hey, buddy, welcome to my world! Do you really think “your” side doesn’t send threats and obscenities to us?” The point is Buddhi episode is an excuse for the folks on the right to make merry and rejoice, by unnecessarily pulling the left into the discourse.

I do not agree that he had anything to do with politics, let alone American party politics. Buddhi has neither done anything which amounts to online political activism, or grassroots political activism or anything that’s worth considering when one looks at what political activism denotes. So I cannot support him on any political ground.

On principle, however, I will support ACLU if freedom of an individual to express something is concerned. This is a shady area, I know. There are all these people who are using homophobic languages and indeed murdering people merely based on their sexual orientations. When ACLU defends the gay activists, it is branded as supporting hate crimes (where speaking in favor of LGBT is considered as hate-speech…ouch!). The fine line between who propagates hate is just that: a fine line. Especially after 9/11, it is more so. And I am not sure if we can tolerate all hate-speeches and protect them under first amendment. Buddhi’s talks are cheap and hateful. He must face consequences. But let him not be singled out because he is a foreign national. For, before him, in recent many times, scores of hate speakers have been getting standing ovations. One in a responsible position of authority even went ahead to call for assassination of another elected leader. Many neo-nazi websites are daily preaching hates. And they are fine and running and getting great google ranks! On educational campuses including University of Maryland, one can see preachers all over. I have been stopped by in the campus and my apartment, where preachers come in fake identities to proclaim love and then soon say how all other religions are evil and there is no such thing as a God from other religion.

Buddhi is not an exception in the pool of hate-preachers. Indeed, he is only the most recent (well…almost). And possibly the most inconsequential. And possibly, the most rightist among them.