People's Democracy

 Thinking Together

Dalits are natural allies of the Left. However they are lured away by the orthodoxy and are kept divided into several parties and groups.  "Without any real programmes identified as anti-caste, a secular policy is empty", so says, G Omvedt in `The Hindu' dated June 12, 2003. So why Left should not give thought to transform the policies of the caste system and try to attract dalits in our fold?

• G L Naik, Karnataka

In one of the articles that appeared in the `Deccan Herald' dated January 11, 2003, Prof. Kancha Ilaiah states: "…Dalit Bahujans expect a radical position on annihilation of caste and they want real results in their real life. Unfortunately, there is no Communist critique of Hinduism and religious ideologies that emerged in India. In a country like India atheism does not work".  Please discuss the above aspects with reference to the stand of CPI(M).

• R H Ayi, Dharwad, Karnataka

Many other questions have also been raised concerning the CPI(M)'s understanding on the caste question. Some have, in fact, reflected the other extreme -- why the CPI(M) is concerned about caste when it seeks to transform our society through class struggle?  Some others seek CPI(M)'s understanding of the current caste-based political assertion.

We attempt to put all these questions together and explain the CPI(M)'s holistic approach to the caste question.

AT the outset, it is necessary to state that the quotations given in the questions constitute either an inaccurate and insufficient reading of the CPI(M)'s position on this issue or are based on certain persistent anti-Communist prejudices. Prof. Kancha Ilaiah, in his book on Buddha, as a political philosopher, begins with the same observation concerning the alleged lack of a Communist critique of Hinduism and a study of ancient India and then proceeds to rely almost exclusively on the work of people like Rahul Sankritayan, D D Kosambi, Devi Prasad Chatopadhyaya, R S Sharma and Romila Thapar amongst others.  Amongst these, except for Romila Thapar, who has all along been a consistent secular liberal democrat, all others have at one time or the other, in their life been active members of the Communist Party and remained committed to the cause all through their lives. Their combined work today constitutes the bulwark of the philosophical critique of Hinduism as well as the study of ancient Indian society.  It is, therefore, patently unfair to cast such aspersions, unless, of course, there are other scores to settle.  Incidentally, atheism in India is as old as Indian philosophy itself. It dates back to the Lokayata and the philosophical treatises of Charvaka. 

As regards Gail Omvedt's observation, suffice to state that for the CPI(M), the struggle against caste oppression has always been, as shall be seen, central in its agenda. 

Having said this, let us proceed to understand the CPI(M)'s approach to the caste question. The CPI(M) Party Programme in para 5.12 clearly defines its approach.  "The problem of caste oppression and discrimination has a long history and is deeply rooted in the pre-capitalist social system. The society under capitalist development has compromised with the existing caste system. The Indian bourgeoisie itself fosters caste prejudices. Working class unity presupposes unity against the caste system and the oppression of dalits, since the vast majority of the dalit population are part of the labouring classes. To fight for the abolition of the caste system and all forms of social oppression through a social reform movement is an important part of the democratic revolution. The fight against caste oppression is interlinked with the struggle against class exploitation."

In practice, it has been the Communists who have championed and continue to champion the breaking of caste barriers by encouraging inter-caste marriages and other interactions.   Even today, the CPI(M) organises various activities like mass village-level meals, where people belonging to all castes, commonly partake the food, thus breaking the caste barriers.  One need not go into details on this issue. However, it is necessary to take up various points that have been raised.

First, it is necessary to debunk a common fallacy that attempts to pit caste versus class. Vested interests often advise Communists that since they believe in class divisions in society, caste ought not to engage their attention. Such a mechanical distinction between caste and class is not only a vulgar simplification but divorced from the present day Indian reality.  The caste stratification in our society is something that has come down to us from centuries.  Despite all the refinements and changes within castes and between castes, that have taken place over the years, the basic structure, in so far as the oppression of the dalits or the backward castes is concerned, remains. It is within this social stratification that the class formation in India is taking place.  Capitalism is still developing in India and  the process of the development of society divided into modern capitalist classes, is taking place constantly within the existing caste stratification. The question therefore, is not one of class versus caste. The reality lies in the formation of classes under modern capitalism within the inherited caste structure.  To a large extent, the most exploited classes in our society, constitute the most socially oppressed castes. And, to that extent, the struggle against class exploitation and the struggle against social oppression complement each other. These sections as it were, are subject to dual oppression.  It is this complementarity that not only needs to be recognised but on the basis of that recognition, it must follow that an important task before the Communist movement in our country today is the integration of the struggle against class exploitation with the struggle against social oppression.  As we shall see later, it is only through such an integration that the firm unity of the toilers can be forged and strengthened in order to advance towards People's Democracy.

The main reason for this persistence of social oppression based on caste stratification is the inadequacy of the ruling classes, during the freedom struggle, in addressing themselves to this issue.  The overcoming of caste differentiation was sought through proper social behaviour between individuals and castes without going into the social roots of this phenomenon. Even when it had a correct understanding of the social roots of the problem, it did not have the courage to seize it by the roots.  By refusing to sweep away the feudal and semi-feudal agrarian relations, which was the bedrock for the continuation and persistence of caste exploitation, the leadership of freedom struggle not only permitted but in later years perpetuated the caste exploitation.

Thus, the net result of the ruling class approach to the caste question has been not the building up of a movement for the eradication of social oppression that the caste system represents but for palliatives offered to redress to some degree the suffering of these sections through the extension of the British concept of concessions such as reservations in educational institutions and jobs.  These are projected as an end in itself. This, despite the plethora of statistical information that this has not substantially altered the conditions of a vast majority of the oppressed. In the absence of any meaningful change in agrarian relations, such concessions must be supported.  But no illusions must be entertained that this is the only solution. 

In the very nature of things these palliatives will neither solve the problem of poverty and unemployment, nor change the condition of untouchables and other downtrodden castes.  They will certainly offer some relief, to individuals from these communities, enhance their confidence in their advance, but not change their status.  For the ruling classes these concessions play an important role. In the first place in the general competition for jobs etc, they pit one section of toilers against another.  Secondly, they create an impression among some sections that government is their real friend and they should confine the struggle within the framework of the bourgeois system.  Thus a basis of challenge to the present socio-economic system from the most downtrodden sections is prevented.

However, as the economic crisis deepened in the recent decades, far from the expectations of these different sections being met the disparities started growing.  This led and continues to lead today for the scramble  amongst these different sections for a share of the cake.  As the size of the cake shrinks this scramble takes the form of conflict between various groups. Hence, the demand for reservations from new sections and the opposition to reservations from other sections becomes a common practice. 

It is, in this background of deepening crisis in our country, that one must understand the nature of the present caste assertion.  There are two aspects to this.  On the one hand, as a result of whatever limited development that has taken place since independence and in the background of the deepening crisis, there is a growing consciousness amongst the oppressed castes to rebel against their conditions of social oppression.  This is a positive aspect. Without such a growing consciousness the struggle against oppression and exploitation cannot be carried out decisively.  This is a consciousness that needs to be nurtured and strengthened by the Communists with the effort to integrate this consciousness with the struggles against the present socio-economic system. It is only through such an integration of the struggle against social oppression and the struggle against modern day class exploitation can the struggle for an agrarian revolution be strengthened  and  carried forward to its logical culmination.

There is, however, another aspect to the present day caste assertion.  This is the attempt to try and confine this growing consciousness within the parameters of the concerned caste.  This is resorted to by the leadership of the present day caste-based political mobilisation. While appealing only to the caste consciousness and ignoring, if not evading, the basic issue of the struggle against the existing agrarian order, these leaders once again are appealing for a "change of heart" and not of material conditions. In doing so, they treat this growing consciousness amongst the dalits and the backward caste as separate compartments, as vote banks, for their political fortunes rather than addressing themselves for a genuine solution of the problem.

The appeal of such caste leaders to their following is not to strengthen the common struggle to change the present socio-economic system but use the caste following as a vote bank.  The appeal is to elect their brethren to power.  Thus spreading the illusion that coming to power within the same system that protects the existing socio-economic order is a solution to their problems.  This may serve the lust for power of the leaders but the living conditions of the mass remains as backward as ever.  This has been the experience of the governments that have come to power in Bihar and UP. Neither of them even initiated the implementation of existing land reform legislations that the West Bengal Left Front government has done. By exploiting the growing consciousness amongst the socially oppressed, the leadership is thus, perpetuating the very edifice of exploitation of the existing socio-economic system. Instead of sweeping agrarian changes they seek to preserve the existing order that perpetuates the caste system and its oppression.

Yet, why is it that a significant section of the  oppressed castes are carried away, atleast momentarily, by their leaders' appeal?  Here one must understand the tremendous sense of caste solidarity that exists. In the face of atrocities committed by the upper castes, the only source of resistance and protection the oppressed have is the strength of their being together.  This is particularly so among the Dalits as they are often, and in many cases to date, huddled together and their habitations confined to certain areas.  The bonds of kinship forged through common suffering shape a common consciousness of solidarity.  Their moving together is not due to lack of education or civility as the upper castes contemptuously tend to describe. It is out of sheer necessity to offer the strongest possible resistance to the oppression heaped on them.

The net result of this is that this dual nature of the present caste assertion presents itself in a manner as though, there is a duality of social consciousness amongst the oppressed.  The Communist movement itself has experienced instances of how the oppressed sections are willing to brave the worst police oppression in their economic struggles under the Red flag, but when it comes to electoral preferences and voting, they are guided by their social kinship and caste affinity. It is this apparent duality of social consciousness that the vested interests of the caste leadership seek to preserve.  They do so for electoral benefit.

But in the process, they seek to divorce the struggle against social oppression from the struggle against modern day class exploitation. Thus, instead of strengthening the unity of the toilers against the present socio-economic system, they tend to separate the two struggles thereby weakening this unity.

It is the task of the Communists today in the present situation to integrate these struggles against social oppression with the overall wider class struggle to change the existing socio-economic system and unleash the agrarian revolution.  This is a challenge of our times.  The Red flag should be as active in mobilising the people in the struggles against the new economic policies, against communalism, as in mobilising the oppressed in the struggles against social oppression.

It is precisely because the Communists seek and strive for such an integration that various caste leaders  pour venomous attacks against us.  For when such an integration takes place, there is no room for sordid political bargaining and manoeuvring, that is done by the leaders in the name of the exploited castes.

This, in sum, is the CPI(M)'s understanding, approach and the line on the struggle against caste oppression.